20031134 Ver 1_2008 Monitoring Report_20090126

After Scanning
Fish and Wildlife Assc T°: ?-6G - _
25 Water Tower Lane ? P.O. Box 241
Phone: [phone] ? [phone]
Email: [e-mail] ? Web: www.fishandw
January 23, 2009
Cyndi Karoly
Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
RE: BannerLowes Restoration Project
Streams and Wetlands
DWQ Project #03-1134/ COE #200330365
Post Construction Monitoring Report
Dear Ms. Karoly:
Enclosed is the 2008 Post Construction report on the BannerLowes Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Project for the Collett development project on US 184 in Banner Elk, NC.
Based on the findings of our monitoring of the restored wetlands during the drought conditions
of the past two-three years, we would like to request a meeting with the agencies involved to
determine if the success criteria for the restored wetlands has been met. Consideration of the
success criteria is requested only for the restored wetlands.
Please contact me if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
e
Barbara S. Wiggins
CC: Amanda Jones, COE
Mr. Bob Stultz
o M, O\v
JAN 9, 6 2009
DENR - yyA ' IER Q0AL0 Y
WETLANDS AND ST0R41VVATEfi BRANCH

BannerLowe Mitigation Project
UTA, UTB and Elk River Restoration
Wetland Restoration
DWQ #03-1134
USCOE Action ID No. 200330365
Post-Construction Report 2008
Prepared for submission to:
US Corps of Engineers
NC Dept of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
PREPARED BY:
FISH AND WILDLIFE ASSOCIATES, INC.
PO BOX 241
WHITTIER, NC 28789
January 2009
0 ?? 2g0y
'011
`O?J

1
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures ii
List of Tables ......................................................................................................................iii
PROJECT SITE ...................................................................................................................1
PROJECT HISTORY ..........................................................................................................4
METHODS .......................................................................................................................... 4
RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 5
Pre-Construction Conditions 2004 ...................................................................................... 5
Post Construction Monitoring 2005-2006 ...........................................................................6
Post Construction Monitoring 2007 .................................................................................... 9
Post Construction Monitoring 2008 ..................................................................................12
FUTURE SAMPLING ......................................................................................................24
Appendix A: Preconstruction Photographs ....................................................................... 25
Appendix B ........................................................................................................................34
Stream and Wetland As Built Surveys ..................................................................35
Photographs 2005-2006 .........................................................................................42
Appendix C ........................................................................................................................ 50
Longitudinal Survey Graphs 2005-2006 ............................................................... 51
Longitudinal Photographs October 2006 .............................................................. 54
Pebble Count Graphs October 2006 ...................................................................... 59
Appendix D ....................................................................................................................... 61
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Tables 2006-2007 ....................................................62
Groundwater, Stream level and Crest Gage Graphs 2006-2007 ........................... 66
Appendix E ........................................................................................................................73
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Tables 2006-2008 .................................................... 74
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs 2006-2008 ........................................... 80
Cross Section Photographs 2006-2008 .................................................................. 90
Longitudinal Photographs 2006-2008 ................................................................. 102
Pebble Count Graphs 2006 & 2008 .....................................................................127
Groundwater, Stream level and Crest Gage Graphs 2006-2008 .........................130

List of Figures
Figure 1. Location of BannerLowe Stream and Wetland Restoration Site ....................... 2
Figure 2. Elk River longitudinal profile, BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk,
North Carolina, Monitoring Surveys 2005, 2006 and 2008 ..............................15
Figure 3. Stream A longitudinal profile, BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk,
North Carolina, Monitoring Surveys 2005, 2006 and 2008 ..............................16
Figure 4. Stream B longitudinal profile, Station 0.0 to Station 500.0, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, North Carolina, Monitoring Surveys
2005, 2006 and 2008 ..........................................................................................17
Figure 5. Stream B longitudinal profile, Station 500.0 to Station 1100.0, BannerLowe
t Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, North Carolina, Monitoring Surveys
2005, 2006 and 2008 ..........................................................................................17
I Figure 6. Elk River cross section profile at Station 1805, upstream riffle,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008 .................18

1

Figure 7. Elk River cross section profile at Station 1886, downstream pool,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008 ...................19
Figure 8. Stream A cross section profile at Station 1438, upstream riffle,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008 ...................20
Figure 9. Stream A cross section profile at Station 1599, downstream pool,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008 ...................20
Figure 10. Stream B cross section profile at Station 1209, upstream site,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008 ...................21
Figure 11. Stream B cross section profile at Station 1634, downstream site,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008,
ii
22

List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of As-built Lengths and Restoration Approaches ......................
Table 2. BannerLowe Herbaceous Monitoring Plots Data 2008 ..............................
Table 3. Bank Erosion Pin ............................................................................
14
...... 22
iii

I PROJECT SITE
BannerLowe Mitigation Project
UTA, UTB and Elk River Restoration
Wetland Restoration
DWQ #03-1134
USCOE Action ID No. 200330365
Post-Construction Monitoring 2008
' The BannerLowe Mitigation Project is located in Avery County, NC in the Town of Banner
Elk. The project is located south of Banner Elk on the west side of NC 184 (Tynecastle Road),
in the mountain ecoregion of North Carolina (Figure 1). The property at BannerLowes is
' composed of a total of 29.3 acres bordering Tynecastle Road. Tynecastle Road is the major
thoroughfare into the Town of Banner Elk and the primary commercial corridor. This property
has 720 feet of road frontage on Tynecastle Road. Primary access to the tract is through the
Lowes access drive from Tynecastle Road. Secondary access is over a private road (Glove
Factory Lane) adjacent to the old Glove Factory land (south) and a private road (Stonebridge
Lane) adjacent to a Car Wash (north). Land use in the project vicinity is commercial along
' Tynecastle Road with residential homes set back from the road. The property was used for a
residential home, barn and agricultural pasture prior to construction of the commercial
buildings.

The project is located within the Elk River watershed of the Watauga River Basin. The site lies
in US Geological Survey (USGS) Cataloging Unit 06010103 and North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin 04-02-01 of the Watauga River Basin. The mitigation
project involves three streams and two wetlands on the property. There are two unnamed
tributaries (UTA & UTB), with UTA flowing into the Elk River on the southeast side of the
property. UTB flows into the Elk river at a point downstream of the property. The Elk River
borders the property on the east side. The drainage areas involved include the Elk River at 2.95
square miles, the UTA at 0.04 square miles, and the UTB at 0.1 square miles.
The Elk River flows parallel to Tynecastle Road and bisects the property. The Elk River was
approximately six feet wide and six inches deep with a cobble, gravel, and sand substrate. The
river experiences impacts from beaver activity and floods (March 2003 and September 2004).
These impacts had resulted in bank and channel degradation of the Elk River on the property.
Preconstruction conditions can be seen in the photographs in Appendix A.
Table 1. Summary of As-built Lengths and Restoration Approaches.
Reach Name As-built Length (ft) Restoration Approach
Elk River 387 Restoration
UTA 536 Relocation and Restoration
UTB 1,089 Relocation and Restoration

Total 2,012
s - r 1,
y
? t 1E
u µ^ h 4p ae '?
w
100
a
wlM li
n tia6? dH '
W 40,
i Ow „4'
9 1'?.
4 ? R
701
c River
w
NkN i II
SUGAR CREEK LN
AO
Ni®rtV41,
? r, t ,u ?OR? V
pG
w
„
Strea
m B t"
am ,P• ? ??.?? ??i ?, ? ? '? ? ' ? .?
,I
i
Le end ,
Y £ ,` S" ?..w v,s. , w Valli m rrrv pr 'a
71
CIE Crest Gage
Stream Gage` Stream A
Rain Gage
Ground Water Gage, p 6i
Streams a '' r
• W,® ti
Monitoring Plots
-7t
Wetlands
Figure 1.
Location of BannerLowes
Stream and Wetland
Project Location Restoration Site
Banner Elk, NC
Qai??a`1
062.5125 250 375 500
Feet
Avery County
2

C
1
1
1
1
C
1
1
1
1

For the restoration project, the lower portion of the Elk River (387 If) was stabilized and the
profile and dimension restored in the stretch (Figure 2). UTA was relocated to the south side of
the property and restored for a length of 536 If. Another UT joins with UTA near the head of
the stream, but is not included in the mitigation project. UTA is a perennial stream and was
channelized prior to the project. See photographs of the stream before the project was
constructed in Appendix A. UTB had been channelized and all riparian vegetation removed
during the agricultural use of the property. UTB was an intermittent stream upstream of the
property and became a perennial stream downstream at the confluence with two tributaries
draining the springs west of the property. UTB was relocated and restored to a length of 1,089
If. UTB had been channelized through the pasture, flowing northward into an old pond bed
(Appendix A).
The restoration project included two wetlands located adjacent to the Elk River on the east side
of the river. The project to date has restored Wetland #1 (upstream above the bridge) between
the stormwater wetland BMP and the Elk River. It was restored to 0.30 acres in size. The
project has restored 0.34 acres of Wetland #2 (downstream of the bridge). Further wetlands
have become established on the west side of the Elk River due to natural groundwater flow.
The design for the BannerLowe project involved the restoration of channel dimension, pattern,
and profile on the Elk River and two of its unnamed tributaries (UTA and UTB). After
construction was complete, 2,012 feet of stream had been restored on the site and 0.64 acres of
wetland. This Annual Report details the results of the monitoring efforts performed during
2008 (Year 3 Morphological Surveys) at the BannerLowe Site.
11

' Project History
February 2005 Site Mitigation Plan Completed
' May 2005 Construction Begins on UTA and UTB
July 2005 Completed Construction of UTA and UTB;
' preliminary live stakes, matting and seeding
October 2005 Completed Construction of Elk River; vandalism of
' planted trees and shrubs on UTA and UTB noted
December 2005 Trees and shrubs planted on streams and river

January 2006 UTA repaired
April 2006 Live stake planting on streams and river; ATV
damage to buffer on UTA noted
May 2006 Completed Construction of Wetland Cells;
Repaired structure on UTB
June 2006 Wetland areas seeded and live stakes; buffers
reseeded and planted
September 2006 Replanted vandalized or damaged/dead trees and
shrubs
November-December 2006 Additional replacement trees planted in buffers
June 2007 1st Annual Monitoring Report, 2"d Year
Morphological surveys
Fall 2007 Additional Trees planted in buffers
Spring 2008 Live stakes planted on wetland berm along river
August 2008 2"d Annual Monitoring Report, 3rd Year
Morphological surveys
METHODS
Longitudinal and cross section reference sites were photographed immediately after construction
and will be documented for at least five years following construction. Photographs will be taken
at each of the vegetation plots during each growing season for at least five years following
construction. Two (2) permanent cross-sections will be installed per 1,000 linear feet of stream
restoration work, with one (1) located at a riffle cross-section and one (1) located at a pool cross-
section. There were two cross sections installed on each restored stream segment. A
longitudinal profile will be completed once during the first year after construction and then every
4

' two years (for a total of three times over the five year monitoring period). Measurements will
include thalweg, water surface, inner berm, bankfull, and top of low bank.
' Bank erosion measurements will be made at each permanent cross section. A bank erodibili
ty
hazard index (BEHI) score will also be made at each cross section. Pebble counts will be
' conducted at each permanent cross section (100 counts per cross section) and reach-wide over
twenty bankfull widths (100 counts total). Pebble counts will be conducted one year after
construction and at a two-year interval thereafter at the time the longitudinal field surveys are
' performed.
Vegetative monitoring plots were established on each of the stream restoration stretches. There
' were two 25'x 50' plots each established on UTA, UTB and the Elk River. Trees and shrubs are
flagged and counted each year and survival will be determined based on initial plantings. Within
these monitoring plots, herbaceous vegetation will be monitored using a one meter plot for
' determining density and diversity of herbaceous vegetation. Live stakes are monitored with one
plot 50' long on both sides of the streams adjacent to the vegetative monitoring plots, with all
live stakes counted and tracked to determine survival.
Wetlands will be monitored for success using hydrology determinations through groundwater
wells, crest gage, stream gage and rainfall data, wetland rating scores, vegetative stem counts,
t herbaceous density and diversity, hydrophytic vegetation, and photographs of the two wetland
areas through the monitoring period. These conditions will be monitored for five years or until
success criteria have been met.
' RESULTS - Listed Chronologically f
from Pre Construction
' Pre-Construction Conditions 2004
' Pre-construction observations in April 2004 of the streams UTA and UTB showed impacts from
the agricultural use of the land surrounding the two streams. Photographs of the pre-construction
conditions can be found in Appendix A. UTA had very little buffer and was not protected from
' livestock access. UTB had some areas of natural vegetation and buffer, especially near the
wetland areas on the west side of the project. Most of UTB was heavily impacted from clearing
and livestock access, with drastic changes in pattern and dimension as can be seen in the
' photographs in Appendix A. The Elk River through the project had areas of bank erosion,
dimension impacts from beaver dams, and clearing of the buffer through most of the length
within the project boundaries.
' The wetlands on the project had been impacted historically through fill and livestock access to
the area. All of the valley wetlands and the Elk River were heavily impacted through three
' consecutive floods in September 2004. The Elk River shifted its channel to the west and much
of the wetlands closest to the river were filled with sand and rock debris from the floods. The
Elk River was relocated back into its original channel in October to prevent the channel erosion
' and sediment load from cutting a new channel. The wetland areas adjacent to the river were
heavily impacted from sand and rock deposits and were greatly reduced in size and function.

' Photographs of these conditions can be seen in Appendix A. Restoration of the wetlands and the
connection with the Elk River through the mitigation plan would restore these wetland areas.
' Post Construction 2005-2 006
' Vegetation Monitoring
Longitudinal Profile and Cross Section
Bank Erosion estimates and BEHI
Pebble Count
Wetland Restoration
' Plans showing as built conditions and photographs for the three streams and the two wetlands are
included in Appendix B. The active project construction extended over a long period of time
with more than a year in construction and planting activities for the project. As can be seen on
the timetable of the project history, the stream restoration projects were completed at two
' different times in 2005. The wetlands were not completed until May of 2006. Vegetation
planting efforts were spread out throughout and are continuing into 2007, due to seasonal
planting requirements. There were multiple impacts to the streams and wetlands from adjacent
' construction activities, including stormwater BMP construction, sediment and erosion control
structures, utility installations, and general construction impacts. Vandalism had been noted in
2005 and is still being observed through current field surveys. All of these impacts on the
' projects will be discussed as it impacted the individual monitoring components and how the
impacts were repaired. Lowes opened for business in early July 2006, ending most landscaping
and associated construction activities.
' No excessive rainfall events or floods occurred during 2005 or 2006. Rain events are
documented under the Wetland Restoration monitoring for the site. There were high stream
' level events but no bankfull events in 2005 or 2006 as recorded by the crest gage. More
discussion of the precipitation and stream levels will be covered under the stream longitudinal
profile and the wetland restoration sections of this report.
' Vegetation Monitoring
' STREAMS
Plantings on the three streams began as early as July 2005 and were still continuing into 2007.
There was a partial livestake planting on UTA and UTB in July 2005 along with native grass
' seeding to provide an initial head start for bank stabilization. Elk River was planted with native
seeds and livestakes in October of 2005. All three streams were planted with trees in December
2005 and with the rest of the livestakes in March/April of 2006. Some areas on the streams and
' the Elk River could not be planted, due to continuing site construction, sediment control fencing,
and other limiting factors. In December 2005, a sewer line crossing disturbed a portion of UTB
and a construction vehicle became stuck in UTA, requiring repairs on both those streams.
' Several trees that had been planted along along the streams and river were observed run over,
pushed over or pulled up. Construction on utility lines had impacted all plantings near the lower
section of UTB on the west side.

I

11
n
UTA had lost all of its tree plantings on the south side of the stream in the area from the berm to
the side unnamed tributary, probably due to the ATV that was observed in May 2006 using the
area as a driving track. The area was posted with signs and replanted in the summer of 2006.
Initial vegetation plantings were surveyed during July 2006 for live stakes, tree plantings and
herbaceous cover in the monitoring plots.
WETLANDS
The restored wetlands were completed in May 2006 and seeds and livestakes were planted where
final construction grade was in place. The wetland areas immediately showed signs of
hydrology, hydric soil development and immediate establishment of hydrophytic vegetation with
good growth. The area along the Elk River on both wetlands could not be planted due to
construction activities and Wetland #1 was limited in planting on the stormwater wetland side
until after June 2006. The joint monitoring plots for Wetland #2 and the Elk River were
established and initial stem counts were made.
RESULTS
Vegetative monitoring plot data for the streams and wetlands showed some of the above impacts
during the July survey, but not all of the impacts. None of the plots have been through a full
growing season except for the live stakes on UTA and UTB. Only six monitoring plots out of
eleven were up to design planting numbers in 2006. The other five plots were still under impacts
from construction activities. The number of tree and shrub stems per acre ranged from 67 to 633
stems/acre. Livestake plots ranged from 1200 to 1633 stems/acre on the streams. The wetlands
monitoring plots were only partially planted in 2006 and ranged from no livestakes in one plot to
600 stems/acre in the second plot. Herbaceous plots were established on all streams and wetlands
in 2006 and will be surveyed in 2007 after a full year of unimpacted growth. Preliminary
surveys show that the herbaceous plots are experiencing good growth and cover in the meter
plot. New plantings and replantings of trees, shrubs and livestakes are planned for the winter of
2006-2007 to insure the initial counts met design criteria and will be reported in the 2007
monitoring report.
Longitudinal Profile and Cross Section
The total length of stream channel restored on the three streams on the site was 2012 feet. This
entire length was inspected during Year 1 of the monitoring period (2006) to assess stream
performance. Two cross sections and one longitudinal profile on each stream were surveyed and
plotted in October 2006. The longitudinal profile is shown in Appendix C. A third cross section
on Stream B (Cross Section #1, Station 1219) was located in the intermittent flow section and
has had no flows except for rain runoff. This cross section will be dropped and the remaining
two cross sections will be used for the two permanent cross section monitoring points. Based on
the data collected, all riffles, pools, and other constructed features along the restored channel are
stable and functioning as designed. The lack of significant problem areas along the length of the
restored channel after the occurrence of at least one river flow larger than bankfull discharge
further supports functionality of the design. It is expected that stability and in-stream habitat of
the system will only improve in the coming years as permanent vegetation becomes more
established.

Bank Erosion estimates and BEHI
' Bank erosion estimates were not performed in 2006, but the cross section surveys show no
change from the as-built conditions. Erosion pins will be installed in 2007 and monitored for the
remainder of the monitoring period.
' BEHI observations for UTA were low to very low as the vegetation is very well established, the
channel is connected to its floodplain, and the slope is low. There is one area of higher BEHI
' where the second UT confluence enters UTA. UTB has more disturbed channel where the flood
event in late summer of 2005 washed out all channel vegetation down to rock and bedrock, but
the stream banks were recovering and were well covered with vegetation. UTB BEHI ranges
' from Low to Moderate with some areas showing a High rating. The Elk River has vegetation
growing along its stream banks, but has been slow to completely cover the banks as the majority
of the bank materials were large cobble and even some boulders. This helps to maintain the
' stability of the stream banks even without the vegetation growth. The Elk River BEHI ranges
from Very Low to Moderate, depending on the amount of rocks present in the bank.
' Pebble Count
Pebble counts at each permanent cross section and reach-wide over twenty bankfull widths were
' performed on the three restored streams and the data is shown in Appendix C. Pebble counts for
the Elk River show a very coarse gravel substrate for the river. UTA and UTB have a medium
gravel substrate. UTB is receiving some sediment from the upstream channel construction which
' has not had any water flow other than rain runoff since construction began on the site. The
intermittent channel has become ephemeral until the confluence with the wetland channels.
Downstream of the wetland flow the UTB is perennial.
Wetland Restoration
' Two wetland areas adjacent to the Elk River on the east side were restored. This construction
was completed in May-June 2006 and the wetlands have not experienced a full year after
construction yet. Preliminary groundwater data, stream height, and crest levels from August
' 2006 to February 2007 are shown in Appendix C. Initial data indicates that when the stream
levels rise, the groundwater gages in the two wetlands also respond with a rise in water level.
Soil observations indicate that hydric soils are already developing in both wetland areas. Hydric
' vegetation has covered both wetlands except in the deeper water areas. The Wetland #1 has
experienced ponding on the lower end and adjustments are being made to lower the standing
water level. Final adjustments will be made during the growing season of 2007 in order to
' maintain hydrology of the wetland. All indications show that the two restored wetlands are
functioning as effective wetlands and maintaining the hydrology, vegetation and hydric soil
conditions of a riparian wetland connected to the adjacent Elk River.

Post Construction 2007
' Vegetation Monitoring
Cross Section Survey
Bank Erosion estimates and BEHI
' Wetland Restoration
In 2007, most areas of the stream and wetland restoration project were stable and returning to
natural conditions. Two areas of exception were the stormwater wetland berm shared with the
upper wetland (Wetland #1) and the buffer between Stream A and Lowes parking lot. The
stormwater wetland required some construction repairs and a change in discharge pattern into
' Wetland #1 which disturbed the berm. This area was replanted with herbaceous seeds and plants
after the grading was completed. The buffer along Stream A next to the Lowes parking lot
continued to be impacted by mowing activities. This area was remarked, reflagged, and
' replanted in the fall of 2007. Collett and Associates notified Lowes again of the required buffer
rules. Replanting efforts continued around the restored wetlands during the appropriate season
for plantings.
During 2007 the region was experiencing extreme drought conditions, especially by late summer
and fall. Stream B was dry until just below the discharge outfall from the stormwater BMP, and
' less than 40% of the new stream channel had flow by October 2007. Stream A had no to very
minimal flow and vegetation was growing into the stream channel. No excessive rainfall events
or floods occurred during 2007. Rain events are documented under the Wetland Restoration
monitoring for the site. There were high stream level events but no bankfull events in 2005 -
' 2007 as recorded by the crest gauge. More discussion of the precipitation and stream levels will
be covered under the wetland restoration sections of this report.
' Vegetation Monitoring
Streams
Plantings on the three streams began as earl as Jul 2005 and are still
y y continuing into 2008. As
noted above, the buffer along Stream A has continued to experience impacts from mowing and
' was replanted again in the Fall of 2007, after the vegetation monitoring had been performed for
the year.
Wetlands
In 2007 the first full growing season had been encountered for the restored wetlands. The
' wetland areas continue to show signs of hydrology, hydric soil development and establishment of
hydrophytic vegetation with good growth. This was despite regional drought conditions in
Western NC, indicating successful restoration of wetlands will be possible at this site.
' Additional live stake and tree plantings on the berm between the restored wetlands and the Elk
River were not completed before the monitoring occurred in 2007, due to seasonal requirements.
Vegetation Results
Vegetative monitoring plot data for the streams and wetlands showed some areas of improved
growth and success in 2007 and other areas which are still below the required number of stems.
The tables of the results can be seen in Appendix D. Stream A upper monitoring plot next to the
Lowe's parking lot was still being impacted by mowing in the buffer. More trees and shrubs will
be planted in the fall of 2007 and the area was marked with high visibility stakes and paint. The
live stakes along the stream channel are showing good survival, despite the dry stream channel.
The Stream A lower monitoring plot needs additional replanting to bring the area back up in
stem numbers, but the ones that survived the vandalism and ATV impacts are doing well.
Stream B survival in the lower monitoring plot is in good condition, with good live stake
survival and stem survival. The upper monitoring plot on Stream B needs more density of stems,
but those that were planted are surviving. A replanting of trees and shrubs will be done during
the winter months of 2007-2008 to bring the density in the buffer back to the original planting
density.
The two wetland monitoring plots are doing well with herbaceous vegetation, but the live stakes
' showed poor survival (conditions were too wet where they were planted). The wetlands are
scheduled for replanting at higher elevations on the slopes with trees and live stakes. This will
occur during the winter months of 2007-2008. In Wetland #2, the upper monitoring plot live
' stake area is showing good survival and density. All wetland monitoring plots will be primarily
herbaceous cover due to the degree of moisture present and will be primarily a marsh-type
wetland versus a hardwood or bottomland wetland.
Herbaceous monitoring plots with one exception are showing 80-100% cover. Stem counts
ranged from 17,000-56,000 on most meter plots with the exception of the upper Stream B
monitoring plot. This reach of Stream B has been slow to grow plants of any type, despite
several reseeding attempts and fertilizer additions. More seeding and soil testing will be
performed during the winter months to ensure good growth by the growing season of 2008.
Longitudinal Profile and Cross Section
This was Monitoring Year 2, so no longitudinal profile surveys or pebble counts were performed
Two cross sections on each stream were surveyed and plotted in October 2007. There are some
changes shown on the cross section comparison graphs. Much of the buffer changes from 2006
to 2007 were due to additional land grading after the streams were constructed and surveyed.
Changes in the dimension in Stream A and Stream B from As-Built conditions were due to one
large rain event in the late summer of 2005 which scoured out the vegetation and the channel in
the two smaller streams. Based on the data collected, all riffles, pools, and other constructed
features along the restored channels are stable and functioning as designed. There are small
areas of unstable or eroding stream bank due to the slow growth of vegetation as noted in the
vegetation section of this report, primarily along Stream B. The data from the crest gauge
indicates that several high water events have occurred since completion of the stream restoration
and that the design is functioning as proposed. It is expected that stability and in-stream habitat
of the system will only improve in the coming years as permanent vegetation becomes more
established.
10

Bank Erosion estimates and BEHI
' BEHI observations for UTA were Very Low as the vegetation is very well established, the
channel is connected to its floodplain, and the slope is low. There is one area of less stable banks
where the second UT confluence enters UTA. UTB has more disturbed channel where the flood
' event in late 2005 washed out all channel vegetation down to rock and bedrock, but the stream
banks were recovering and were well covered with vegetation in the lower section. UTB BEHI
ranges from Very Low to Low with some of the dry upstream areas showing a Moderate to High
' rating. The Elk River has vegetation growing along its stream banks and has stabilized well,
despite the dry weather conditions. The Elk River BEHI ranges from Very Low to Low,
depending on the bank height and bank angle.
' Erosion pins were installed in 2007 and will be monitored for the remainder of the monitoring
period.
' Wetland Restoration
Two wetland areas adjacent to the Elk River on the east side were restored with the design of a
backwater depression and a levee next to the Elk River. This is the first full year after
construction was completed in June 2006. Groundwater data, stream height, crest levels, and
' rainfall amounts from August 2006 to January 2008 are shown in Appendix D. Two of the
gauges lost memory during the period February to June 2007. These two gauges were in
separate wetlands, so there was at least one gauge functioning during this period in each wetland.
Gauges GW2 and GW3 were in Wetland #1 on the upstream side of the access bridge and
showed saturated conditions during the growing season. GW2 was in hydrology that had
standing water on the surface during part of the monitoring period and within 2" of the surface
' the remaining time. GW3 generally showed hydrology present within 5' to 10" of the surface for
the whole period graphed. Steps were taken to reduce the ponding of the water in Wetland #1
with future adjustments possible if standing water remains too high, even in the dryer seasons.
In Wetland #2 on the downstream side of the access bridge, GWl and GW4 fluctuated between
5" and 20" in water level below the surface throughout the period, with generally higher water
levels in the winter and lower in the dryer summer months. Variation in the elevation was
present during the summer and fall months which were related to the rain events in the valley.
The Restored Wetlands meet the success criteria of hydrology of inundation or saturation within
' 12 inches of the soil surface for a minimum of 8-20 consecutive days of the growing season
beginning May 1 and ending October 11 for the 2006 and 2007 growing seasons.
Hydric soil conditions were documented in both restored wetlands. Wetland #1 had a soil
classification of 7.5 YR 4/1 in the top 12" with mottles of 7.5 YR 4/6 in sandy loam soil. The
soil was saturated throughout and inundated in some locations within the wetland. Wetland #2
' had soils with l OYR 3/1 in 0'-2", 2.5Y 3/1 from 2"-8", and 2.5 Y 7/2 in 8" - 18" with mottles
throughout in a clayey loam soil. The water table was noted at 12" in both wetlands in August
2007.
1
11

' Vegetation success has been achieved with 100% herbaceous cover in the restored wetlands with
almost 100% hydrophytic vegetation present within the boundaries of the two Wetlands. The
' wetlands' species are comparable to reference marsh-type wetlands common in the Elk River
watershed. Stem counts for trees and shrubs on the berms and levee have not been as successful,
due to the delay in planting and as shown on the vegetative result table. Additional plantings and
stakings will be made to insure the success criteria of 328 stems/acres are achieved for the
wetland berm areas.
' Overbank flow was monitored with the crest gauge. No data shows that the river crested over
the levee on the upstream site where the gauge was located. However, the levee in the
downstream reach of Wetland #2 was built slightly lower and seemed to experience a bankfull
' event when the crest gauge showed elevated water levels below but close to bankfull. There may
have been two events over the period graphed where bankfull was achieved on the lower
wetland. Another factor involved in the hydration of the wetlands was the consistency of the
' levees and general soil in the buffer adjacent to the Elk River -a mixture of soil and large cobble
and boulders from historic and current flood events. The cobble mixture allows water flow
between the wetlands and the Elk River during less than bankfull events. This can be observed
through the comparison of the water levels of the groundwater wells and the river water levels
over the period monitored. Peaks in the river water levels can be observed at the same time as
elevation peaks in the groundwater wells, indicating a connection between the water levels of
' both the wetlands and the river.
Measurement of the wetland area showed 0.29 acres in Wetland 41 and 0.29 acres in Wetland #2
' for a total of 0.58, a slight decrease from the 0.64 acres measured in 2007. This minor decrease
was during a period of drought and showed stable restored wetlands on the project site.
Especially in Wetland #1, the wetland is expanding towards the adjacent commercial property
' due to spring heads on the south side. Expansion towards the stormwater wetland BMP is also
expected now that construction and repair activities have been completed.
' Post Construction 2008
Vegetation Monitoring
Longitudinal Profile Survey
' Cross Section Survey
Bank Erosion estimates and BEHI
Wetland Restoration
' In 2008 the area in western North Carolina experienced the second to third year of drought
conditions, with the area under extreme drought during certain periods of time. The project areas
' of the stream and wetland restoration project were stable and returning to natural conditions.
The stormwater wetland berm has become vegetated after the repair work of 2007 and the native
vegetation was becoming established. This growth around and in the stormwater wetland was
' slowed by the dry conditions, but the vegetation is present, albeit very small. The buffer along
Stream A next to the Lowes parking lot continued to be impacted by mowing activities. Despite
the communication with Lowes, mowing continued within the buffer area on the north side of
Stream A. Collett and Associates have discussed the situation with Lowes management. A
proposal for replanting 3-5 year old trees and a fence installed is being prepared for Lowes.
12

' During 2008 the region was experiencing extreme drought conditions for the second full year,
' especially by late summer and fall. Stream B was dry until just below the discharge from the
wetland areas and less than 50% of the new stream channel had flow by August 2008. Stream A
had little to no flow and vegetation (primarily rushes) were growing in the stream channel. Rain
' events are documented under the Wetland Restoration monitoring for the site. There were high
stream level events in 2008 and at least one bankfull event in late August 2008. More discussion
of the precipitation and stream levels will be covered under the wetland restoration sections of
this report.
' Vegetation Monitoring
Streams
Plantings on the three streams began as early as July 2005 and were completed in the spring of
' 2008. As noted above, the buffer along Stream A has continued to experience impacts from
mowing and was replanted again in the spring of 2008. The new trees were impacted by mowing
during 2008 prior to the monitoring in August 2008.
Wetlands
' In 2008 the restored wetlands had experienced the second full growing season. The wetland
areas continued to show signs of hydrology, hydric soil development and establishment of
hydrophytic vegetation with good growth as can be seen in the Photos in Appendix E. This was
' despite regional drought conditions in Western NC as noted previously.
Vegetation Results
' Vegetative monitoring plot data for the streams and wetlands showed some areas of improved
growth and success in 2008 and other areas which are still below the required number of stems.
' The tables of the results can be seen in Appendix E. Replanting of trees and shrubs occurred in
the spring of 2008 and are noted in the tables as replanted within the monitoring plots.
Replanting of the plots will be done to raise the number of stems to meet the success criteria.
' Some of the replanted trees did not survive during the drought conditions of 2008. Some
changes in species identification over the years have occurred as the specimens have grown large
enough for definitive identification, particularly the birch species.
' Stream A plot counts showed the impact of the drought conditions in the region. The lower
Stream A vegetation monitoring plot was replanted with additional stems, but was still under the
' Year 3 Success Criteria. Two of the stems replanted earlier this year did not survive for the
August plant survey. Stream A upper monitoring plot exceeded the success criteria for the MY3,
primarily due to the replanting efforts. Stream A buffer next to the Lowe's parking lot was still
' being impacted by mowing. The live stakes along the stream channel were showing good
survival of silky willows, despite the dry stream channel. The rest of the buffer area around
Stream A was well covered with native vegetation on the south side. The north side was grass
' lawn with occasional tree stems. This mowed buffer area will be addressed through additional
13
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
replanting of older (3-5 year old) trees and installation of a fence during the coming year by
Lowes management.
Stream B survival in the lower monitoring plot was still short on stem survival, also due to the
drought conditions. The live stake plot was showing good survival and growth, primarily of
silky willows. The upper monitoring plot on Stream B showed good volunteer growth of
additional black cherry trees and elderberry shrubs. The total stem count met the success criteria
for the plot for MY3.
The restored wetland monitoring plots were doing well with herbaceous, hydrophytic vegetation
well established. Both restored wetland areas are recovering as marsh-type wetland, with
herbaceous species as the predominate vegetation. Both plots in Wetland #1 are meeting the
stem success criteria for Year 3. Most of the stems are shrubs, due to the wetland conditions, but
river birch and black willow are also present in one of the plots. Tree survival will be limited to
the edges of the plots due to the hydrology in the wetland. Wetland #2 vegetation monitoring
plots are well above the Year 3 success criteria. Silky willows were the predominant species that
are surviving due to the wet conditions. Red maple and black cherry trees were also found on
the slopes above the wetland. The majority of vegetation in Wetland #2 monitoring plots was
rushes and other herbaceous wetland species. The Elk River/Wetland #2 live stake area is
showing good survival and density of silky willow, willow sp., and silky dogwood.
Herbaceous monitoring plots with one exception are showing 80-100% cover as shown in the
photographs in Appendix D. Stem counts ranged from 11,000- 49,000 on all meter plots with
the exception of the upper Stream B monitoring plot (Table 2). This reach of Stream B has been
slow to grow plants of any type, despite several reseeding attempts and fertilizer additions. The
drought conditions have made it difficult for herbaceous plants to become established. There is
progress in vegetative cover occurring in this reach, however, and with return to normal rainfall
amounts should be well established by the end of the monitoring period.
Table 2. BannerLowe Herbaceous Monitoring Plots Data 2008
Stem Counts/sq. meter
Stream A 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Upper 31,500 27,500
Lower 17,500 23,750

Stream B
Upper 1,000 1,750
Lower 18,750 11,750

Wetland # 1
Upper 56,750 35,000
Lower 29,000 33,000

Wetland #2 & El k River
Upper 30,000 28,500
Lower 28,250 49,000
14
Longitudinal Profile and Cross Section
A longitudinal profile and two cross sections on each stream were surveyed and plotted in
August 2008. The longitudinal profile was surveyed in 2005 (As-Built), 2006 and 2008 and the
results shown in Figures 2-5. The Elk River profile showed only minor changes from the As-
Built condition. In areas where depth had increased in 2006, deposition refilled to As-Built
condition or above in 2008. No headcutting was observed and the structures are holding the
profile as designed. Some accumulation of bed material was occurring in the riffles.
Elk River Longitudinal Profile Comparison
107 T-
105
103
0
101
a?
W
99
97
95 - - - 1 -1 -
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Station (ft)
---- Asbuilt ----MYI . MY3
Figure 2. Elk River longitudinal profile, BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, North
Carolina, Monitoring Surveys 2005, 2006 and 2008.
15
UTA Longitudinal Profile Comparison
105
100
95
c
0
90
v
w
85
80
75
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Station (ft)
I
-Asbuilt MY] MY3
Figure 3. Stream A longitudinal profile, BannerLowe Project, Avery County, Banner Elk, North
Carolina, Monitoring Surveys 2005, 2006 and 2008.
Stream A showed a stable profile over the three year period. No headcutting or major changes in
the profile can be seen in Figure 3. There was some adjustment of the stream channel with
increased slopes and less pools after the drop/pool structures. Most the stream was covered with
vegetation and the channel was being encroached by vegetation during the low flow conditions
of 2008. This allowed for more deposition of fine sediments and the creation of more runs and
riffles with less pools. The profile was considered in a stable condition for an intermittent
stream.
Stream B profiles are shown in Figures 4 and 5. The upper stations (Figure 4) were dry during
the monitoring survey in 2008. This portion of the stream had shown intermittent stream
characteristics previously and did not pick up perennial flows in the summer until below the
wetland on the west side of the project. The upper profile had shown some areas of adjustment,
but overall was maintaining the design profile elevation. One reach near Station 125-175 will be
watched for bed erosion continuing in that area.
16
UTB Longitudinal Profile Comparison
Station 0 to 500 ft.
loo - -
95 _-
- 90 - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
c
0
-' 85
v
W 80 - - - - - - - - - - -- --
75
70
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Station (ft)
----Asbuilt MYI MY3
i
Figure 4. Stream B longitudinal profile, Station 0.0 to Station 500.0, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, North Carolina, Monitoring Surveys 2005, 2006 and 2008.
The lower profile stations (Figure 5) from Station 500.0 - Station 1100.0 had enough water flow
during the summer months to allow for the growth of wetland plants, particularly at the lower
end where a solid stand of rushes was established in 2008. The profile showed adjustment at
some stations, but overall maintained the As-Built profile elevations. Areas of deposition and
erosion were observed on the profile, but the structures were holding nickpoints in place.
Longitudinal profiles will be surveyed in 2010 during monitoring year 5 for any further changes
or signs of unstable conditions.
e
500
UTB Longitudinal Profile Comparison
Station 500 to 1100
75 70 f •-- -
65
c
O
60
55
50
45 --
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Station (ft)
----Asbuilt -----MYI MY3
Figure 5. Stream B longitudinal profile, Station 500.0 to Station 1100.0, BannerLowe ProJject
Avery County, Banner Elk, North Carolina, Monitoring Surveys 2005, 2006 and 2008.
17
The cross section surveys performed this year showed similar stability as the profiles. There are
some changes shown on the cross section comparison graphs shown in Figures 6-11. Much of
the changes from As-Built conditions were due to additional land grading along the buffer after
the streams were constructed and surveyed. On the Elk River, the cross section surveys show the
structures and features along the restored channels are stable and functioning as designed
(Figures 6-7). Vegetation is well established at both Elk River Cross Section Stations, providing
additional bank stabilization.
97.00 -
96.00
95.00 -
w
p 94.00 -
y 93.00
W
92.00
91.00
Elk River Riffle 1805
Cross Section
90.00 ? - - -
0 10 20 30 Width (t)40 50 60 70
t 0kt-06 --•- OU-07 r Aug-08
Figure 6. Elk River cross section profile at Station 1805, upstream riffle, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008.
18
97.00
%.00
95.00
94.00
o 93.00
c?
92.00
W 91.00
90.00
89.00
88.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Width (ft)
-s Oct-06 -? - Oct-07 A Aug-08
i
Figure 7. Elk River cross section profile at Station 1886, downstream pool, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008.
For Stream A, the riffle dimension shows no changes, but the pool dimension shows shifting of
sides and shape (Figures 8-9). This was observed to be a stable channel as shown in the
photographs in Appendix E and from observations of the channel and stream bank throughout
Stream A. The changes observed were due to the stream adjusting and shifting to a stable
dimension. Most of the Stream A channel was 100% covered by canopy and many places had
vegetation growing within the channel, due to the lack of flow in the stream.
19
Elk River Pool 1886
Cross Section
Stream A Riffle 1438
Cross Section
98.00
97.00 -
%.00 - -
0
95.00 r - -
W 94.00 -
93.00
92.00 -
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Width ($)
-s Oct-06 -¦- Oct-07 * Aug-08
Figure 8. Stream A cross section profile at Station 1438, upstream riffle, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008.
Stream A Pool 1599
Cross Section
97.00
%.00
95.00
94.00
r;
0 93.00
92.00 f
W 91.00
90.00
89.00 f -
88.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Width ($)
-? Oct-06 -- Oct-07 -*--- Aug-08
Figure 9. Stream A cross section profile at Station 1599, downstream pool, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008.
Stream B cross section at Station 1209 has continued to widen, but has maintained the same
depth over the years (Figure 10). The widening of the cross section is due to limited vegetation
20
on the upper stations on Stream B. The vegetation was more stressed in the upper reach due to
the drought conditions. There are small areas of unstable or eroding stream bank due to the slow
growth of vegetation as noted in the vegetation section of this report, in the upper reaches of
Stream B. The pool at Station 1634 showed little change over the last 4 years (Figure 11).
The data from the crest gauge indicates that several high water events have occurred since
completion of the stream restoration and that the design is functioning as designed. As noted in
previous reports, it is expected that stability and in-stream habitat of the system will only
improve in the coming years as the stream channels stabilize into a final pattern, dimension and
profile. All streams will be assisted when the buffer vegetation becomes established.
Photographs of each stream profile and cross section are included in the Appendix E of this
report.
98
97
96
95
94 -
0
93 -
92
W 91
90 -
89

88 .- i
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Width (ft)
- A Oct-06 --a- Oct-07 --s-- Aug-081
Figure 10. Stream B cross section profile at Station 1209, upstream site, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008.
21
Stream B Station 1209
Cross Section
99.00
98.00
97.00
96.00
0
95.00
W 94.00 --
93.00
92.00
91.00 -
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Width (ft)
-?-- Oct-06 -s- Oct-07 -r- Aug-08
Figure 11. Stream B cross section profile at Station 1634, downstream site, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, Banner Elk, NC, 2006-2008.
Bank Erosion estimates and BEHI
No major changes in BEHI on the three streams were seen over the past 3 years. BEHI
observations for UTA were Very Low to Low as the vegetation is very well established, the
channel is connected to its floodplain, and the slope is low. There is one area of less stable banks
where the second UT confluence enters UTA. UTB BEHI ranges from Very Low to Low with
some of the dry upstream areas showing a Moderate rating. The upstream UTB BEHI will
improve further as the vegetation growth improves. The Elk River has vegetation growing along
its stream banks and has remained stabilized, despite the dry weather conditions. The Elk River
BEHI ranges from Very Low to Low, depending on the bank height and bank angle.
Table 3. Bank Erosion Pin
2007
Initial Set
2008
2009
UTA Cross Section #1 0.0 -0.5"
UTA Cross Section #2 0.0 0.0
UTB Cross Section #1 0.0 0.0
UTB Cross Section #2 0.0 -0.5"
Elk River Cross Section #1 0.0 +0.3
Elk River Cross Section #2 0.0 +0.4"
22
Stream B Station 1634
Cross Section

No changes in erosion pin measurements were observed except for slight changes due to the
' extensive vegetative growth that has provided increased deposition of organic material over the
pins.
' Pebble Count
Pebble counts at each permanent cross section were performed on the three restored streams and
the data is shown in Appendix E. Pebble counts for the Elk River showed a shift from a very
coarse gravel substrate in 2006 to a finer gravel and sandy substrate in 2008. UTA has shifted
from a medium gravel substrate to a silty substrate. UTA flow was reduced greatly in 2008 and
' the channel was invaded by rooted vegetation, contributing to the shift in substrate. This was a
natural shift due to flow reduction and was not an indication of channel instability. UTB also
shifted from a medium gravel substrate to a predominately silty substrate. UTB, like UTA, was
' experiencing intermittent flow regimes during 2007 and 2008. The upper intermittent channel
on UTB had become ephemeral until the confluence with the wetland channels.
Wetland Restoration
Two wetland areas continued to be restored as wetlands. Groundwater data, stream height, crest
' levels, and rainfall amounts from January 2008 to December 2008 are shown in Appendix E.
The restored wetlands were evaluated as to whether they met the success criteria of hydrology of
inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the soil surface for a minimum of 8-20 consecutive
' days of the growing season beginning May 1 and ending October 11 for the 2008 growing
season.

I'.

Gauges GW2 and GW3 in Wetland #1 showed saturated or surface water conditions throughout
the growing season in 2008 as shown on the graphs in Appendix E. Wetland #1 received an
increase in hydrology source with the new discharge outlet from the stormwater wetland BMP
into the southern end of the wetland. G W 1 in Wetland #2 showed saturated conditions during
the growing season for well over 20 consecutive days in June-July 2008. GW4 did not show
saturated conditions for 8 consecutive days in 2008. Saturation at 12" depth at GW4 occurred
intermittently during rain events in June and July, but due to the drought conditions in the region,
were not sustained. GW4 lost a source of hydrology when the stormwater wetland BMP outlet
was realigned to discharge into the upper restored wetland. The old discharge alignment resulted
in much of the stormwater wetland flow to pass through the culvert in the road berm to the lower
Wetland #2. Despite this decrease in hydrology, overall Wetland #2 retained wetland
characteristics of hydrology, hydric soil and hydrophytic vegetation. Unless the drought
continues, this area should remain as a restored wetland in the future.
Hydric soil conditions were documented in both restored wetlands. Wetland #1 had a soil
classification of 7.5 YR 2.5/1 in the top 12" with mottles of 7.5 YR 5/8 in sandy clay loam soil.
The soil was saturated throughout and inundated in some locations within the wetland. The
water table was noted above the soil surface (0.5"). Wetland #2 had soils with 10YR 3/2 in the
0"- 4" horizon, with mottles of 7.5 5/8 with a sandy clay loam soil. The soils were l OYR 4/1
23

1

L

r

from 4"-12". At 12", stream gravel and cobble were encountered in higher proportions. The
water table was noted at above the soil surface (0.5").
Vegetation success has been achieved with 100% herbaceous cover in the restored wetlands with
almost 100% hydrophytic vegetation present within the boundaries of the two Wetlands. The
wetlands' species are comparable to reference marsh-type wetlands common in the Elk River
watershed. Species found prevalent in both wetlands are Juncus effusus, carex sp., Salix sericea,
and Mimulus ringens. Many other wetland species were present in community pockets in and
around the wetlands.
Overbank flow from the Elk River to the wetlands was monitored with the crest gauge. At one
date the crest gage was at or close to top of bank. Five other dates in 2008 the crest gage showed
the stream level within 4" of top of bank. When the crest gage elevated points are compared
with the groundwater wells within the wetlands, there is a match between the elevated crest gage
readings and some of the groundwater well levels. The consistency of the levees and general soil
in the buffer adjacent to the Elk River -a mixture of soil and large cobble and boulders from
historic and current flood events- allows water flow between the wetlands and the Elk River
during less than bankfull events. Similarly, peaks in the river water levels in the stream gage
graph (Appendix E) can be observed at the same time as elevation peaks in the groundwater
wells, indicating a connection between the water levels of both the wetlands and the river.
Measurement of the wetland areas in 2008 showed 0.29 acres in Wetland #1 (down from 0.30 ac
in 2007) and 0.29 acres in Wetland #2 (down from 0.32 ac in 2007) restored so far for a total of
0.58 acres restored. This compares with 0.64 acres restored in 2007. Considering the extent of
the drought conditions in the region, this was a minor decrease and showed that the wetlands will
maintain hydrology during dry conditions. Expansion towards the stormwater wetland BMP has
balanced some of the loss of wetland in Wetland #1.
FUTURE SAMPLING
Annual sampling will be performed at the BannerLowes Project site in 2009 and 2010 or until
the success benchmarks are achieved.
24
Appendix A
Pre-Construction Photographs
25

II
1I
1
fy.

Elk River looking downstream, behind Elk River looking downstream on BannerLowe
' Great Train Factory, Bannerlowe Project, April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
Project, April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
r

y i
OyF ?.
Orr
Elk River looking downstream on
BannerLowe Project, eroded banks,
April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
4
yy e
??"w .- wpaM?', a 1•',??F?' Ar .i• ,dG. i Tr h ,
f O a ;,+ " 'b i y,;•
?I r?r J?
?I 1,4
ATA

Elk River looking upstream from mid-point,
BannerLowe Project, April 15, 2004,
Avery County, NC. S FVgn
rr ui
Yew
IF,
'Af
Y?W

Elk River looking downstream at Beaver
Dam on BannerLowe Project,
April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
0
dG• x ??g,a f ?
n:.
Elk River looking upstream from
Stonebridge Lane, BannerLowe Project
April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
26

UTB Headwaters looking upstream,
' Bannerlowe Project, April 15, 2004,
Avery County, NC.

k,
WV '6„p.,,N '14
UTB Impacted by animal access,
looking downstream on
BannerLowe Project, April 15, 2004,
Avery County, NC.
h ??°1? ?p a C kM
1
4 1M
s 'tfh i + t* 'K ' n? H1 gun. +ad ? ?.?
' UTB linear wetlands, BannerLowe Project,
April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
UTB looking upstream from end of
Project, BannerLowe Project, April
15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
27
`F
?" Y i$ ??wp '•.y`N :."war uf'" ..
r U ? 1?°'?5t »UTA headwaters looking upstream, BannerLowe UTA looking downstream towards Elk
Project, April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC. River, BannerLowe Project, April 15,
2004, Avery County, NC.

"r??,,_ y 7 P YV « MQypy?
L
°'?R. aura '? IF l W'IF ?tl 4: may,,
Ul'A downstream end near confluence with
the Elk River, BannerLowe Project,
April 15, 2004, Avery County, NC.
28
1 ? ? 1
A y
} . ,., „4 6
?-
k ym
?yi. ? 1' YYY ?y + J. y ? N .I M ? ,yq 5
1 "Mp F[f U ??' •'1q ?' ?? ?1
g C n?M r?2
i AA, o- R Y4t ? t; Y v ,.r'a w?u
4
p!w
-41
f'
Wetland #l, BannerLowe Project, April 15, 2004, Avery
County, NC.
I ?? ¢ +fY
s
.F4? ? :i MMt IR??? a . rtM"* .µ a.
ry'` r
y ,L5 ?i I F
* .,?I?IYI i'' is{: : ? t'"r',. ,'°? ,?n{y'*lpp yV?u °' ' ? ? t .?' ^?r' "?j "?4 ?;°'? v, ?t•t
?, ? ? ,! ? 3,+ub R* I . , ? A w" ? twy,y' 'r r ? 'N gJ
?' ? Id L e ^v 1' f h,.Wetland #2, BannerLowe Project, April 15, 2004
Avery County, NC.

29
f L M.
r
x
4 ?w ? ,.« k ,.?_ Ali
X
uw;, a

Wetland #3, Bannerl-owe Project, April 15, 2004,
Avery County, NC.
30

Elk River looking downstream from Glove Factory Lane
Bridge after hurricane floods, new channel cut to left side,
September 24, 2004, BannerLowe
Project, Avery County, NC.

Elk River looking upstream at new channel entering old channel,
Post hurricane flood, September 24, 2004, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, NC.
31
r?.T1: 3 X? . R

.. ! ?` .mac»' .

A
A*Av
we
.4
IFS-' "''i P`u '7••' .. i 'SI .'T?jMs}' y .
.
Elk River and Wetland 2, flood deposits after Hurricane floods, September
24, 2004, BannerLowe Project, Avery County, NC.
Elk River at Glove Factory Lane looking downstream, post 3rd hurricane
flood event, September 30, 2004, BannerLowe Project,
Avery County, NC.
32

R: w.w. _..A•
AP'°: -f
Elk River looking upstream, additional cobble deposits,
post 3rd hurricane flood event, September 30, 2004,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, NC.
w. ''
N y
?ji''k4.A ` G'1 j ix"" T??7?r.Y ,gyp a,':yy, 1t M?:
Elk River and Wetland #2 additional sand deposits,
Post-3 hurricane flood events, September 30, 2004,
BannerLowe Project, Avery County, NC.
33

i

Appendix B
' Stream and Wetland As-Built Surveys
Photographs 2005

34

1
7

1
0

fl

o

i
{ CO
?t
O

z

W c l

00
z

,? a4 o
?
z °
1

i

3
5 „nna^

? .•-
r
a
lLJ
Brit

IQ-

zero =
1

11

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

JOIN
O '? - - - 1
i a
\ r ?
ti ? I f ? '11,', or
` r t
f {? I \ W
S I ? Z
tt? ? i v
t ! j ? ! ' 222111
f ! i 1?
i
< "t I
rr
t
<
?P' H'0A-MSd"a l3'tli? 10'?ti 1+^4?h••OuM??1„%5
1 36 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i 0000+m V1S 9 imms 3NnHDIVW
i ?
1 f i, ac rt
1 zzo
IL
a? I ? F
/ ?d I / i?* G
i
I`
p 1 j OF
I II X
/ I
?? I
11X
a ? 1
I y ; a?
aF \ ? i
i?
? a
1 ' ?a
I 1
O
g 1 1 O?
I.
1 y
f ?
I I I'i
I j O
N
? '? I a
r
a
I a?}
f r i j ? ?a
fr
1 1
r
r
rr
r
?i50"96r"M6d'If3"tlL?lhl f W-??{?is
1 37 1
11
full,
ils
I
Z
W

d
Z
a

t ? i
m

7 I

i I

I 1
I
f
1 Is
0 1
1 '1
'1
/ j ?

G -T
x
1 ???ti X
?, 1 1 \x
i ? l 1
J
I `
( 1 r`
i Q a0
_ 0
"?? Agra I I ?
d.d t
44_
d'
?
?Jn f f
f f !]'
f f
l
F
f ?
f
f f
i i
o ?
?l I \
oo'oo+% V1S S 133HS 3NnHOIVW

V
0
W
W
a
W
Q
a
II
i

J
?
Gd it;"
38
ill i
t
Ins]
¦
OD
rc

err ?
" r!
1 ?. ?? it l
i / rl i!
cS vt

9
I
to
MF
I

co
39
MINN ?y ?
i z q? W
RR W2
6 3E 2f° 0000 Q o
a4 c9~w p
ff ?? zQF¢
of X o
gwo
0000+91 V1S Z 133HS 3NIIHOiVW p?a
<na¢
w
,Y Zw
CL IL
t WOZ
yt W-jU
4 !
QWm
1f /M 1, ?E,\ O F
d Qjo
1 Z O co
Uw°-w
W W O9-?
4 ??? I 1I1 = J hZO
`1 m 1 1 1 ? U 0U)-U)
O 1 1 1 O U ZN
1 M 1 I) O2w,
1 I Ini I fn VoJa
m H 1q- ?p
6 ~ C
1111 U S Z NWU
IY W
_ _ III 1 W O
Z
7 U
I
11 Il Iil fQn Q
jr W Z
O 1111 < LL
Q
/qy, M I ?? i z 0
', /' , I 1 g W
a III
W ? I I I ~ J
LL
/-' 1 111 /I
1 I?'
_____ I 111 f//
``? ) I 1 1
? ) 1
/ II
/ /III
? / ll/ 11
_? II
I/ 1
)/ 1
6`? f \ \
f \
f
p
wY '
I
f
F I
?6P'[-«sd-ESe-Hla-azele?o l'^Q-+c wbce??NP QFi
40

0
F

? R ? =Y
75
° ? o
F
R G
n
0
O
z
00

J zo<

a COX
I w0
z • a ?Wa
0
_
t= U) o
WW rn a
w
°

-
----___- ?? z
w
LL, gw
o O
O -: 0 O °•
` aao
0
Z N _
> c
di40 .?Q 1o 0
z
Wso
0 Q
, LULLO
0 \00 E)
t w
\ \ Q W m
>
W W

? w
\\
i
w 0
I `\ 1\1\ 2 wq

ZYp
\ 1y? I ?0 1D0 UW=
c
(n -J o
?Lw
\ 1
1
1
\
3 F?
Z
\ \ 1
1
1 ;
\
c ,
O O
\ ?? o

\ I 1 \\
O F
-
to
w
Z
I 1 \\
g o F 0 fn
$ oo?
/

0
LL
1 O LL
'
W
? NWU
V I 1?,,
/ 1 1 \ 1
1
\T\
/
,4
i' I \? 1 1\1

`
\
o\
\\\\
O1

~
L) CAD
/
I \ 11 1
U b

J
W
co w I
I
Iv
I
c I
I
I a
I
??
a 16X
?P

??G
S

P
M
/ / "'P'Z NSd 850-v13 tl2>[BSa I`^9-se?.,6?cep,,N?g?OF/'
41
Stream A at head of project looking downstream, BannerLowes Mitigation
Project, Banner Elk, NC, September 2005.
F ?.
a
l t M ?w. ?i
14
Stream A, looking downstream at mid-point of project, BannerLowes
Mitigation Project, Banner Elk, NC, September 2005.
42
r
?. 4
'M M1?,? r„??, s CU k
t
f.
r
a
Stream A, looking downstream towards Elk River, BannerLowes Mitigation
Project, Banner Elk, NC September 2005.
43
' t??i ray
• ?

J;
k
u s,s.J? ?F
Stream B looking downstream from head of project, BannerLowes Mitigation
Project, Banner Elk, NC, September 2005.

loom
eF ? :. hk '.. rx
Stream B looking downstream at wetland drainage confluence, middle of
project, BannerLowes Mitigation Project, Banner Elk, September 2005.
44
?' . rlG
r? n
[.
4
?r o
y ? 4
i
Stream B looking downstream from mid-point of stream, BannerLowes
Mitigation Project, Banner Elk, NC, September 2005.
M3.
M
?.
.. 4 .
"wz
x
r,.
fk .r+ r
L4 . ... Y
Stream B looking at downstream end of project, BannerLowes Mitigation
Project, Banner Elk, NC, September 2005.
45

A

r q ?_
t ?
a
iF...aS 4 ^c w -? i rr u t . a d
?r z
µ
NI.
Elk River looking downstream from bridge crossing, BannerLowes Mitigation
Project, Banner Elk, NC, May 2006.
A
iY?n 5 r
T.
? afr
Elk River looking upstream at first structure, BannerLowes Mitigation
Project, Banner Elk, NC, May 2005.
46
d
- I *r
r
kl?
`AC'r w?. 4i• a
"Ovt Q%%
o pA R f. ?,? ?
,
Elk River looking upstream at second structure, BannerLowes Mitigation
Project, Banner Elk, NC, May 2005.
:

Aw
Ar" ,, • 0 _

Elk River looking upstream at second and third structure, BannerLowes
Mitigation Project, Banner Elk, NC, May 2005.
e
47
i
r
A?j
41
ay'MwF4
466-141.
Upper Created Wetland and Elk River buffer, BannerLowes Mitigation Project,
Banner Elk, NC, June 2006. I
i hrk
"? = ?3 r 'ti1F p 'r*5
Y
.. Mg 4 !\
m ,,.
M
nr, Af r` mmn.p

u
., Z', r ?4. Upper Created Wetland and Stormwater BMP, BannerLowes Mitigation Project,
Banner Elk, NC, June 2006.
48
,X?JW,WtlW'.?ovwd•wpQ.nwr
?u Ik*I ,
3 3;; 5 its •y Ji rp? ??? ??? ' lu *?,.
r {? t
...c V? d t w,i l"d a o •,'
Sys w w
,""?, r???'?? ?,.?'.w,a- A.-,;M X?~?«p, ?'M ?`w wry Ma ? ,?;? 4? _ ?,.?,w?p?',•? , „
7 7
wx r? 1 ? ..r
.k ?? ,? ?.rr? ?h?pN, `??„?;i?,W * ? ? ? '? tiN • •=s. y. m.? ,,.r. nwr W;a, ? ? L ' ir,.: ;'°? ?.J' ;,,." ?: ?;
r? .
a a
Lower Created Wetland, BannerLowes Mitigation Project, Banner Elk, NC,
June 2006.
a
Lower Created Wetland outlet to Elk River, BannerLowes Mitigation Project,
Banner Elk, NC, May 2006.
49
Appendix C
Longitudinal Survey Graphs 2005-2006
Photographs October 2006
Pebble Count Graphs October 2006
50
O
O
O
N
O
O
N
L
I.L
.be
V
Cl) W
w
W ,
O L
J ?
L Q,?
m ?
V
O
L
Q.
O
CD
r
O
O
r
T V
VJ
(D o
00
Cl)
O
Tl-
00
r
c-
O
r
00 (D Iq
O 0 O

M M M
C%4 0
O O
ti ti
M M
(:U) U014BA013
00
m
CD
M
O
CO
M
O
CO
CO
M
51
14-
N
LO
CO
Q
t
V
O L
m ?
V
It
N
LO
Ir-
d' 11
N
v
0
c?
d'
M
vl-
d'
N
LO
N
d'
N
LO
LO It It ti ti ?
M M M M M co
(4) u01jen813
52
O
ti
M
ti
M
O `-
Ir-
ti
M
M
O
O
N
O
N
m
s
V
/1 1
3 L
0 ?
L
1
M?
W
V
M
O
O
N
M
T-
M
O
N $
CO c
O
4w
N
M
O
O
N
d'
M
O
d7
N
N
It-
M
O
O
N
O O
O
ti
M
53
CO LO tt CC N O
ti ti ti r
M M M (4) U0 IBAA013 M M
JHook 1

F
14, 9M
`

7 a
4' k? s

UTA 020
UTA 022
JHook 2
UTA021
UTA 023
54
UTA 024
P d '?qM1
is,
"i:
UTA PPI
UTA PP4
UTA 025
UTA PP2
UTA PP5
55
UTB 030

Y d
4 c: qua * ? k xM? -' a w;3'? f

.. ,Mw
WL wh `?x JAL
.,,
a .a+

UTB 034
UTB 041
UTB 033
UTB 037
UTB PP 1
56
.,?, x. Kr1, , • s? :" ?"?n'?n? 1?,, ?'.. ?i?`?'rr ? _ x'*'4 P + ' _'?
?.?' ,?• c? ?"z' r ? h ?,k' Jilµf.,'K+`w sy C YC?a .?' '??
.#?? ?M?'" 1. ? r°? ?i+rk b' War "'' ?y ? ?'v ? 4'?.1.?Ya `x . •Mr ???r
UTB PP2
W ..
X A ?yk,,'M?,NbF ^}}fir r.. - y' ym?, , •."
R ? a.l?t : ry zIII
UTB PP4
R
µ?.+e
Y R
P.? ,OJ
§

?r '1"
r
f r 4''
r ° '
d
? !C s
'
?
? ! ry
}
•
? g
f(e?
,
UTB PP6
X eit_ i ja'?LR+
UTB PP3
:: 1 11 s.
. 11E
W

xY" •4' ra a .„ a?tX '•. , °$' ?Y ?JV?? V
,}
.

w + N-
.? w"!}.`- T . w. _.??F? ;.WW?„ •F3_ ? . ?.. • , ?. i' "?rsi7`? ? r 1'.+6„??y?y, ?. t., ..
UTB PP5
?I?1 Mal6??d l? A ? ?. ? 4 a .T °?Igq J
T' Ww b 1.
«r
f'
C, 44
w Y t
57
UTB PP7
r ..
Yj
J '
htl
? •A
v
Y M)OV
} 1,?r ' "' f 9
JM +S
UTB PP8
UTB PP9
R+ !w F J S ; xyt e? ? ?' M Yu
+ f i , e X
I n. ??'?,^??-•#y? ? . 'fir {n i '(`.'? Y? ?? ? ? M,? S*•,F
Y'
1
W , I
A a .,
pert a..+? ? Ye ?a MS 1^?t ,?
f % }'„+.S' Iwo / "•°?",?';.. ? 6 ?A?l € ^f. c ????y?r"'? ;. ?"?
UTB PP 10
XVANE 1
58
UTB PP I I

L
59

11
11
I
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Lowes - Year 1 monitoring - UTA
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00-
50.00
CL
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.01
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Lowes - Year 1 monitoring - UTB
100.00 _I 1 l 1
90.00
80.00 ?
1
?
?
1
Reach Summary
,
70.00 iffle Summary I
- P
0o Sum ry
ma ,

?I

,
60.00 - ? I - -r , } f
}?
? L 1 4
I
eB 50.00 i r
i
a 1
40.00
! ,t
II
h
II

I
30.00 - . - ' _ I
?_ I II
?

,
.

r

I

I
Ii
II f
I'I
,

20.00
-? '
,
{ 4 1?r' } F I
L
r+
_
I
I
-
t I
? I?
fL1
10.00 I
+??
II
.- 1? III ? 1 j
_ 1
1
0.00
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size - Finer Than (mm)
60
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size - Finer Than (mm)
1
L

1
1

F

Appendix D
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Tables 2006-2007
Groundwater, Stream Level and Crest Gauge Graphs 2006-2007

61

1
1

1

1

1

yN O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- N O O O O O

N
V '-+ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O = O -?
u

Cl ?•
N
N
a M N ,.. O O 00
p O N _

O
s., >

cd O

N ?
C?, O
O y

N
N U G. .N? N ? O ?
w O

N
O
U ? `J, "'" N O M ?
?
B
cn
v
o c "
a

?° O
x ? bn o °,
a , ca

U C'i
3
as
¢
o
3
3
°
U

(n ' En w
c
Q o

z Y

-
U
U
?1, Q Q Q Q 9 V)

O Q

Q ? .? eQi

O Q

Q Q

O Q O O

F"
F"
N
C

O

"
N

^O

O
p

b4

N U
U

h
Q
Q
QU
C
?
O
Q
5
O
Q M kn
C
O cli
N U
?

CA

;oD GQ
C'
C)
R
c
Q Q Q .? i

W ?L U U c: U ?
N 0. U
U
5
7
3
i
,
62
6 w
a O M M O ON O O O O -- O O O d' O N N O M O

y
O N ?n O ?D O O O O -+ O O O O ,N., N O O

r. N M N N
O
N to
O
N

O N
O C'G

VJ ? , O
C
C O

U un
O O
`a p N .. N M M N 7 00
U w
N N
w a
-- O M M ? N M

O
U
Y
N

? - t ° ?
.? ? ° o o o 0 3
v ?° as ¢ o 3 3 x c ° 3 a 7y
3 ? U U U

o s
CL
00 0

p ? O ? y O p ? ? ? ? ? ,U ?. ? ,7•+ w M vl
? ti ?

?
y
y ?
W
C? s 2 1 '
z

C
O
R
?'
a,
a+
c3 °?
O ?
N
ML
M
63
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

y? ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? M O O O B O O

V '., ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -•? M O O O vl O O

M M

?
O
. O

N
M N O? O o0

a

Q, ?" M M N
Cd

3
H
>
V 0
? y

?7r
y N

U O
N
N a" O 00

Q

C
C ? N

N
? U

.C 3

o U x `?' d ?' 6
U U U
cc Cd C* 3 >
? a i c
? ti Q o

?

Q Q
Q

° o

0 Ln .

0

O
Q o
i
O Q s
p
Q Q 1:3 Q
N O G

U

?

?

Q

?

? N >? U
M U
V'1
`
" •? ? Q 0.r ? GL U ? ? O Q ? O Q O '3 ad
0 0. c
y c
y

O v
H ? +?, Obi +?, +? Q ? N ? ?' •? ? ? ? U ? -? ? ?

U
4
y
a
a
64

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
L
A)
?. oo O O O O M O O O

0 0 0 0 0 O? O O o0 N ^•? O

i
N
CIO

b
O
_
p N

? Q+ ~ 00 00 NO M ? 00

N
3 N

.M

N
om" ?aE
?
M
?O
01

t

w .
`n > 0.

3
cm ? W o 0
.C
Ln Cl, N
00
U N

2
? i
sr N
U

E
1

0
°
.fl
.? ti 3 3 to
a GG
" ?i -o o =
3 ca a
79

0 b b

.
U 3 a
a ¢ $ u 3 x
-
3
a
-
.?
y

U U

13
o
F
a

m

W ? Cs ? ? fi ? ? ? •? O ? h o ? o ?

0
5
U
?i
9
4
8
0
65
a
0
w
v
as
0
0
L
C7
F-
0
800Z-Utlf-91
LOOZ-3aQ-I £
LOOZ-OOG-S I
LOOZ-^ON-6Z
LOOZ-AoN-£i
LOOZ-130-8Z
LOOZ-13O-Z I
LOOZ-daS-9Z
LOOZ-daS-0 I
LOOZ-Bnd-SZ
LOOZ-SnV-60
LOOZ-Inf-t,Z
LOOZ-Inf-80
LOOZ-unf-IZ
LOOZ-unf-90
LOOZ-,(IOW-OZ
LOOZ-,(t'W-i70
LOOZ-jdV-8I A
LOOZ-ldd-ZO
LOOZ-'uW-L I
LOOZ--'L'W-I0
LOOZ-Qaj-b I
LOOZ-ut'f-6Z
LOOZ-UUf-£l
900Z-aaQ-BZ
900Z-3aQ-ZI
900Z-^oN-9Z
900Z-AON-60
900Z-hO-17Z
900Z-13O-80
900Z-daS-ZZ
900Z-daS-90
900Z-Snd-I Z
900Z-Bn`d-SO
900Z-Inf-OZ
N
66
CD ?n o
? N
(sapui) uol;Bnalg
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

a
0
as
i
0
0
0
i
b0
N
3
C7
N O --N M
(sagaal) aol;eealg
67
800Z-ulaf-S I
LOOZ-aaQ-O£
LOOZ-33U-bt
LOOZ-^ON-8Z
LOOZ-^ON-Z I
LOOZ-100-LZ
LOOZ-130-II
LOOZ-daS-SZ
LOOZ-daS-60
LOOZ-$nd-bZ
LOOZ-iinV-80
LOOZ-Inf-£Z
LOOZ-Inf-LO
LOOZ-Unf-IZ
LOOZ-Unf-SO
LOOZ-,(uN-OZ
LOOZ-XEIN-170
LOOZ-ldd-8I A
LOOZ-sdd-ZO
LOOZ-JuIN-L I
LOO - EN-I0
LOOZ-ga3-£i
LOOZ-uuf-8Z
LOOZ-U'3f-Z I
90OZ-33U-LZ
900Z-aaa-11
90OZ-^ON-SZ
90OZ-AOK-60
90OZ-;a0-tz
90OZ-1a0-80
90OZ-daS-ZZ
90OZ-daS-90
90OZ-inV-IZ
90OZ-$nd-SO
90OZ-Inf-OZ
vi
i
0
0
e?
Q
C
O
ou
M
L7

800Z-ulef-£1
LOOZ-aaQ-8Z
LOOZ-33G-Z I
LOOZ-AON-9Z
LOOZ-AON- II
LOOZ-100-9Z
LOOZ-100-01
LOOZ-daS-t,Z
LOOZ-daS-60
LOOZ-$nV-bZ
LOOZ-8nV-80
LOOZ-Inf-£Z
LOOZ-Inf-80
LOOZ-unf-ZZ
LOOZ-unf-90
LOOZ-Xl3W- I Z
LOOZ-INW90
LOOZ-l dV-OZ A
LOOZ-ldV-b0
LOOZ-.IBW-6I
LOOZ-JL'W-170
LOOZ-4ad-9I
LOOZ-unf-I£
LOOZ-ut'f-91
900Z-aaQ-i£
900Z-aaQ-S I
90OZ-AON-6Z
90OZ-AON-£I
90OZ-1a0-6Z
90OZ-1a0-£ l
90OZ-daS-LZ
90OZ-daS-II
90OZ-2nV-LZ
90OZ-$nV-II
- 90OZ-Inf-9Z
N
68
o ?n o ?n o
(gaui) UOI;t Aa[:
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

0
0
v
a
a?
o
bn
It
C7
0
69
800Z-UVf-9 I
LOOZ-OKI-O£
LOOZ-aaQ-b t
LOOZ-AON-8Z
LOOZ-AON-Z l
LOOZ-130-LZ
LOOZ-1a0- I I
LOOZ-daS-SZ
LOOZ-daS-60
LOOZ-2nV-t,Z
LOOZ-$nV-80
LOOZ-Inf-£Z
LOOZ-Inf-LO
LOOZ-unf-IZ
LOOZ-unf-SO
LOOZ-AW-OZ
LOOZ-Awto „
LOOZ-1dV-81
A
LOOZ--idV-ZO
LOOZ-Jt'IN-L I
LOOZ-Ju W- I 0
LOOZ-9ad-£I
LOOZ-uuf-8Z
LOOZ-uW-Z I
90OZ-33G-LZ
90OZ-aaQ- 11
90OZ-^ON-SZ
90OZ-AON-60
90OZ-130-17Z
90OZ-130-80
90OZ-daS-ZZ
90OZ-daS-90
90OZ-?nV-IZ
90OZ-$nV-SO
90OZ-Inf-OZ
0
M
n o kn o to
N N
(sayaul) u01JBn31:1
00
O
O
N
CC
C
r
O
O
N
m
b?
bA
e?
Gy{S
it
a
W
M
CP o
`P
00-
<0 ?O?°a ?O
00? P.
`o
? ?0 1
<I
190
OO?o4 l
`O?
00?,
X00 I?9I
X00
OI
l0 T ?0 Ca
O?
T I
?00e
?0 Jed ?
190
l/
<00 9 y 9I
?zp
< -0 90
90?a60
190
JP??
9
-000
aP o
00
-00 , 1, >
0
-000 .9?'?O I
O
O 90? a O
OOe? ,
o?
70
(sag3ui)13nal AleaJJS
h
bD
C
bD
C?
y
L
U
a
W
O N
(gJUI) [ana-I Ja;eM
d'
%e,
/J P
l U? J'kl
a
l JP.
?- ??J ll
l aP.
op' co
l00
lpp
9
J
l Q,
li Op ; 2?
I lp 'O.
oRV dp
!O°2a kz
l?z? bi
lop o?
lp 4b
lp f0
<'O
?! l
<?27
O
lp0 ??? l?E
c;G I A
O
1002-.x
0
l C
O
0?' I?
E: l E
0
0? J l0
to ad
0k J mac'
a
!Op ? 60
<00
91
E l is
000 62
? ?r4 st
9 !:
Opr J Ip
9 aP.
oOr? ?r
9 P.
00?a 60
900 °
?, or
9p,g
9 JO.
002a fI
9 as
002% 6c'
aQ
s?
71
V?' ?O o0 O N V ?O
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t?
a?
e?
a
0
u
a
OQ
G
?O p
1P z
loo
`? Jd I
°0, P
!0 ?o fr
?Ooe o?
? ao sl
o°z
?0 400 f0
<" Q 00,
' 150
<0
°e a
I <-°z? 9Q
°o?
6O
it ?p jOr9
0e
!Q /Gf
Oe c'l a>
GG e
<,g
L9,,
??z A
C00? A??l
O? IG.
Oe 11
?o
o?9ay ?o
s
I
?QO"t 90
IO
O
9 Q??P/
90?0Pf?
191-
°Oc-
90 X00 60
00 0,
a
N 00 lD N .-• 00 ?O N O Q °pG f
?f
(sagaai) uouu;!diaajd
72

Appendix E
' Vegetation Monitoring Plot Tables 2006-2008
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs 2006-2008
Cross Section Photographs 2006-2008
' Longitudinal Photographs 2006-2008
Pebble Count Graphs 2006 & 2008
Groundwater, Stream level and Crest Gage Graphs 2006-2008

1

1 73

u

1

a?
V M [F O O M M O M

O
O N O -- '-+ O O O O O -- O

Q

?
? O N d' O ^ 0 0 0 O O O --? O
,
E-"
Un
M
a

d'
N
Gtr rq -- N M
O

00 rA
r+

V5 E
> N N
O
m n
N L

N N
U'
o ?
N
N

?. cn
N
M
O M N N O? t- O? co

O o"'
U ?

O
?
O

'
o c 4
- 44 o
" d
? p
Q) C N s.. C
C ? •
? ID ?
•, > ()
H
/ . M ry
? M?_ .

z
a sz
Ez o ? ?
o

_O

C

Q)
ti
G
O
Y
u
C
7
a
w
1
3
1
14
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

? H
N
y O O? -? O M O O N M
t?, O
U

N -- N O - O N O O
N
N

.. p?
c*"'' O
s.,
F4
U ?
O

O
0
O
O O
L1. M
...
--
N
--
r-•
N
N
M
N
00

U cn E
cti ?
O

N
O
?j N
"z
N
>
O
U as

4
44? N
3
M i?
?
) tf) 00 V

U c
?

o

o
x
?
3
0
?
Q u
c CL
3 c
S. :t4 ca al
ca
>
? u ? aa Q 3 m aa U u
0
?
?, U U

?
?
? ?
? H o
E- r. a ?
a
? O a 0

N
en
kf)
?
O u ?
-

ti
ti
W Cd

75
0
as
to
0
Q
O
U
C
o,
W

} O M O O D Y -- O O M

O O M O O O N
_

N
?,,, O O O M O -- O O ?n

N N
M M
O
s.
U
O

O
pq ?k
O O M O 00
? N O M M

? U
G N v? o0

?n z. O

V ? O.
v N O

O
O
a
M Q) L1. N N N ?n

° cn
4
, N

N
O 3
O M
''.
M
ch
?"
N
rn
00
O ?

O ?
U ?
E

O
3 °

ca Cd
x 3 3 i ? ° ? ?
c
s
. .
U U
-- ° M En
? aa 3 aa 3 ?, E

N ,? U U
y ? °

Vl V1
Qn ?J ?
O ?

a
? O
U O
U?

M V 1
? A O 0.
O

CQ
cn c

W
?
x
13 Q
? ? O

U
I ti
r
N
J
n
i..
a?
O
O

O
y
Cl,
7
J
L4
5
1
C
N
76

1
1
1
1

m ca
0
0
--
O
^
O
O
O
N
y
C1

co?
U
C?s
?N
d
O
O
O
M
O
O
O
O
C-•
"

C'n
U
0 0 0 0 0 0 rn O O O C•

s,
U ?
O
rn ``7'
N

00 N
Q O M N ,? N M M O 00

"
v
U

s. O
U O ?
N
? N

O O
a
ccl ? a N N N

N

O
V ?
as

^O O
U
U ? N y ? 3 ? c? of ,
? ?

ss V V U G)
c0 m O U
cn v?

y 0 U U
cr
z

? ? ?
O
?' ° E? o o ?
? •? ? ? ? U U ?
p O ? ' M '7"'
.. r+ M N
r46)
° ?+ U N
v? ? w y. ?" E

f-+
U 64) O ti O S c

u
1.4
s?
N
U
C
O

C3
C
:G
0.

7
4
ri
a
1
77

1
1

1
1

a?

N
C,
Q N r r
,

U
N
O
0. .-• N
^
T
cr
O

Q 00
O

E~ ?
O
d
a? N

? O
? N

?
U 3
te a Q 3 ?
. o

> 3

N
U C?

? H

O

CID O O
v
? ? E
M
r^ 11

I N O
y
.ry r^
Vl ? .L ? ?

C
5
U
n
u
ri
N
7
r
r
78

y
O
?
O
N
n
F
V]
U
'cj N ? M

O N
a ? ? ~

O

00
(? O

.O

T3 N N

O
?
cC
N

° 3
U 3 O
u
44 0 cC) 3
o

U ?
U C?

? H

?u
•

C a
V
l E
M
rV
W

E? rz
'

4
U
n
U
a
C
r
,
,
r
1

1

1
1

i

a?

oo 00
O M

N
? 00 00
O
Q N

00 00

00
O
O
N
a
N
N
00
N

O

? O

O
O
U ?

3 0

a ? 3 0 3

3 v y
r
oa

o
? H

o
?
,U

rol?

U cn
0
a
ria
c?
O
H
M
cl
M
79
45?y? n M1
a

4

pp

'
' t ly •rd:,.

? r

R ,

d
" '
Mr ?M
e .s

e11 it' I W^
0
an ?
c bn
o Q
aU
07
? W
R3 L+
xm
'C3 U
cq .O
r Y?
03
to cd^
Y-,
Con
0
O
v?mc°v
O ?
O. O
? N
C A
?z
? C
x ?
?o
>a
?J 0
s.
N
0 3
0
C/) CO
Alk
!
f
3 fty
80
O
bA ?
? bA
O Q
?z
?W
? G
x C°
?o
t•,
a 3
0
O
Cn m O

W
L
a?
o
0.
C C
LZ O
? bA
? N
O O
•? L
Q?
toM
m
0. 0. N
N
L ?
O Q
Ca
i o U
v??z
W
L
U
o ?
.D U
L ?
O O
..O G.
c ?
? o
cq a?
a 3
O
y C
m
?O
Q ' L r71
I':.
u'
d flµ ai
14? ?y
'tn
a

-4 3 P,
aM

81
W
L
a?
CC
.i7 U
L CJ
O O
?a
cl o
ca
A
a 3
O
•? i.a
N
N ?
(1) ct
> 06
O _O O
i1 C1. N
O Q
CC r
a?
??z
W
L
Q?
x
C/J W
>_ U
RJ r
cn O
O Z
C?3
N bA
cC
L
v
x;
?o
•? L
>aao
oar
C aj
L ? U
x
w
L
?cl
,_1 O
L
?a
o
CZ
U •_th
L
N
o
A M/C
W
> o
op.,o
to o
?y O
,v •rr
-lid
w
L

>
U
_
L

y
?= 3

?'?, .§an^ oA c
i
- o
? k yJ ?
? O }ate

' Y y .?,. ape
h 7
V/
82
o ?
0. E
b4 ?
C !s.
N
O ?
c U
Oz
ow
? L
U U
N
O
? L
a
c
CA
v
? o
L
Ca
un CO N
_O O
0. O
N
? N
CU
?z
Lon
O w
U a.
U U
CCs ?
C
)
U
^O U
? •O
.o
.an
a ?
w
L

r

A
'
N

"

y
Y ?{
?. k

83
_O
bA ?
r
O Q
C U
oz
? W
O i
a? y
U C
as
in sr_
U
U
? •O
i=
M? 3
w O
N
N >; 00
?(? N
c
0

i
U ?

?m o

LL ? O

Am v

i
w Y? ?
O O
v

C
o
CIS
tj)
i
a?
? o
?a
c
3 m?
n? °o
u = N
a
oz
a ' i
_C
a
O O U
y o O
84
r-
? .o
o ?
? , on
a
X ?
> c
bn ?,
i O Q
N
a. ? U
0
? J.+ L
Q
? U
N
O
CL?A.

4

Oro-
f

A

1
,
5
w?
C
aoi an
v ?
x?
?o
.? RS CJ
m N
3 bn Q
? =u
?z
0
ow
3 a c
.a •? m
? O v
'n O O
rL ? a
a
o
o ?
v an
U
v
xv
C O
v i.
> v
bA ? O
t N
v C
?z
?o
c o
th cl
Q ? U
? O v
v O •O
C? ? CL
c
c°, an
i..
v
x3
? O
> ? o0
M O
bvA (? N
v ? Q
o c ?j
0
a o
3a
O
v O •O
85
a?
3
., o
c
?o m r:
0
? o c°v
u. ?
°U
w
3
o > m
U
y O
c?
U
3
. o
> L
i].
N
? o U
U U
O ct3 O
C
O ?
O
? O
> U
wx?'

86
U
3
.. o
°
> LW
c
? ? o0
(7? N
U
U
N? U
?z
Q' w
° _>
V -? U
U
tY O • y-,
M O
s. O
Q> v , ?
W X ?

k Vie;

?
- ? ar?:, rw
ra
W
L
v
o ?
U
.? U
L ?
O
L
O
bA
u En
3
I--I ?
O
C1. N
G
r-
::
N . to
Q
z
w
L
o a
o ?
U
.? U
L ?
O
L
? 0.
c
cz O
> c?C
bA
N
L
o
cq _Y
O
y 0. O
3 ?O
N
L >l
0
O
87

w
L
o ?
U
? V
L
L
..O p„
O
> 03
bb
bA
U
3a
O z-
? U
C
m 06
? _O O
N 0. N
Q ? Q
??z
rA
L L
U
by O (?
O
3
o bjo
cn
to p
bl) o
a?
? GO
o ? o
O
C to
O N
7 ti
i O V
O
an
u
1? o qua
U
bq O C
to O p?
O
ca O O
3
ctdo ?. O
o
a?
?o
bA
O
3 >?
o??Z
a 3 ? •?
? o aA W
88
a?
U
r- cC
cn O Gq
C cC 0.
O
c, O O
0 0 c
a?
0 3 c
rmo
? O E N
33>¢
a?i?? oU
s.. O
o ? ? Z
4 o w
Ai I
ryM4
h
f iY
` yy
Mr
{ MR

u
o
Off;- h

-x

r_
0
.Z
m
bn
0
a?
0 0
U
O
C
c?
cs S m
to N
v
N '3 z
?w
.? m
U
0
o 'o
x to a.
C
0
o ?
c 3
0 0
U t"'
O U
C
C
m O
0 3 0
U
N 3z
?w
3
.? m
f.? bA Gl.
0
o ?
0 0
U i.
O N
C
? ? o0
? m O
'CS N
? c
N3z
c
?b
3
IM
O ? U
f? bA a
89
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1438; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
?ryy ?
,mot
iri+ r
'r M f ?L ',? ??rrY?
iiA
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1438; left
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
s Fri a x„+
f
A?
:k a?` ski
ff'w ?. n k ,f.
+ a5 1 tl 'n. '%&? ? n?+ x ti i
a e M
wk
j t r"'?k !?'r 11W`.z $t?, ?I ?tlr r-
ec
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1438; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
90
TMs ?` '? ,vRY,?6'.fh? ?FR? Ywra?w,

t ?
'
,x
44? ??ts !4 x? p,+ ,H
. N:' lei
r o
`
,"e
ar
•
,
d
y'. 'MY Sf?g p 117 '+N W
i . ?,
.+u
M ANt
I
.
,
4 1
{

Stream A, Cross Section Station 1438; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1438; right
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
??? .. fy W..:
aE
esA it {; ?'d R. ? kV
1
(St
? 5 ?" R
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1438; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
91
4 t3,
F
Y? sb t r)
t ? Ay'' .Yy?i E
s
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1599; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1599; left
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.

rvh? Y q, ? rd
,"" t' W d qs1 " F l nW yk

. ?1 ? 4f lydq
pi,
?
qh`.> 1
e
j
k
'
Y .
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1599; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
92
s Mk.y

rp
f ? 1 4

' w

Stream A, Cross Section Station 1599; right Stream A, Cross Section Station 1599; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006. bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
Stream A, Cross Section Station 1599; right
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
93
N
Y
"
°
`
'Owl
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1634; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.

A4

Tl k R
?
? '+
t l 'w d
i? qq

nR R D -4 M k
?
?
S:
t }M ?.
a?x
?
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1634; left
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
U'i

iFkr ?
s
s t'

?
6
D Y
44
VAIR
r

P?
?Ileed

Stream B, Cross Section Station 1634; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
94
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1634; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
7

`?st
T
y
x
?
?gi??.phG y ?
F
D
,}1W
d°

v Al
l.
5 F
, l
,,,
to a
7 `
? ,??j Ri?•,"gqv ?'i?y,:? ns Y
,?? .,?: ??"e'

Stream B, Cross Section Station 1634; right
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1634; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
95
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1918; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
i
is
?.e ?, l by M1? •?
. f ki'Y r? M •1_i
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1918; left
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1918; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
96
.. ,1

?,, .gip r f t? d4ff

v , ?
-'111r

? ? 'r. i, -,•,? f? ? "_ ?. R?' as of "'"'.`.?R , ..?.
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1918; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1918; right
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
S A' IcE'A%,Y Y t £? i
ei:
, b r A
A?'lyyf
*+y??'?k
Stream B, Cross Section Station 1918; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
97
4 R
F '? RF y ? i'
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1805; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
ey ?4
xh * t ' a .eau.
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1805; left
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
-M "'AtW
?a
V?
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1805; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
98
d
„ x w f?e t
0
.? tl k N ut/ d
J't S ?i4 i??r tl •?; '? ? to
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1805; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
P ??r
w ,
a
:ice'
i4l 1?? 4
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1805; right
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
pp'?+r b'?'k t?"u ?Jx at
„max .}
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1805; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
99
r y µ'.. b? ' n5
p
iii" F e ? «? ..,,F .' ??.. ? x_? ?•_-?_.:--._ _
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1886; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1886; left
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1886; left
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
100
w
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1886; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2006.
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1886; right
bank, BannerLowe, August 2008.
Elk River, Cross Section Station 1886; right
bank, BannerLowe, October 2007.
101

yl?lpx '' s4+ ?q+
??nx R

1n

I +y

J Hook 1, October 2007, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC
102
J Hook 1, October 2006, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.
J Hook 1, August 2008, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.
J Hook 2, October 2006, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.
J Hook 2, October 2007, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.
103
J Hook 2, August 2008, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.

XVANE 1, October 2006, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.

F

XVANE 1, October 2007, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.

:Yi
G
F w y
i. ?
XVANE 1, August 2008, Elk River, Banner Elk, NC.
104

Elk River Restoration Reach, looking downstream, June 2007, Banner Elk, NC.
105
Elk River Restoration Reach, looking downstream, October 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
7 °
j 3
4
s 5p

Stream UTA looking downstream, July 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

Y
b°•;... ?: of ? ?
? tl F R 4
.?Y ¢ y i0i M eY ?..
y?
Ci

e
T
. t

Stream UTA looking downstream, October 2007, Banner Elk, NC.

? ta4u
? a^ k
N Mme. ?'".hZ?
i

A- 1101
L y?' ?? ti. ?•w7W ?.
$" ? M 8
W p
Fm
Stream UTA looking downstream, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
106
,. .? rue
a s r k,;a v+"p
»

'4
.
1
a
? ?;M u
s
" s
Stream UTA looking downstream from midpoint, June 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

f

F
l? 'n I ?
? V . 9
gi ?

I
Stream UTA looking downstream from midpoint, October 2007, Banner Elk, NC.

T

? .
'
t a

! Y +?
? w?i:. +1, •t d yr q', ?q
W°

Aix*
?
"you .: s

Stream UTA looking downstream from midpoint, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
107
kw?r??4 h?i?+ i
Stream UTA looking downstream at end of project, June 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

? r &4
y.
stream UTA looking downstream at end of project, October 2007, Banner Elk, NC.
stream U1 A looking downstream at end of project, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
108
F" `?` va uR lea( y(a•
' 'h ` fr ? 'r45 ,?k'?, i '?•? r
,. ? .end a 1f .
e
(?• vN ?4 v • t c sd
?" ,? xe a W / ?, w t..
110
?'si' yA`•?l } 's 4 n?? r ? d(rIS r :S ?1 n ww
?? "- ?, ?' ? ., h r Y ?, a s ?,r. F. t 6 ? `g i iQ•, y? +• ? A + R?il
#4}S, i. #t'1 tu?? tai tt l7 d
4 a t o a? a
"%1 Iwo
Y ? 4 ? 1 • }. F't '"" 5y !WNW t ?ti ?'+?"?,+ ¢,'
?? k ?• r yh ? sy ,qua t ?R `, {$r ? `u + K .,. ? ? ? ? ? ,'!? „.
K7?r' s 1,•'t'?w tx*rl _ '" •'a # ,.` s c + wm 7`?. at i ,?
a ? ° ; $ rd?' s? A 41, :" y°? e j "? ?1. A . ? ??'w ._ o?. ,, ? _? x'F ?;a '?a +an*? y
Z 4k
A+ ?x 4 „ ?k "t?ti 3 y? r?

NN 'Ii
{ i •' 'I'r ?.+? ti {M' A 4iY.A r?iyT?#',A.9 ?? ? • s 9 41v f
,fig ? f
7 r YSS "t 'k d? t+?+ "%? i f Jb fir, ]pg? ?k? 8 , >a M i!.
w t ?.' ? a* , ?d s6?a
Ar? e a
Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 1, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
109
-__ ___ ._ ._.. •.r?+.. .N w r`+.+ ? ,,.... r. • .e ,Ela -?*7a1cn^rea5?..
Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 1, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
a
L

e' f
41, ?A?,??i, A-0O4W
Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 2, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

4 + ? 1r
14 pI
?V ? 3 ?(^, _ rS? ? Y?T? x x { b' i 9ryC ? ?'"§!k? r'•
? t
at ?! .„eft ??? 4 ?qq.? ? ?????'?? 4 ?? ??? ..t? ?;? ? ? ?•!???
7 R t < q .? -
w
Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 2, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
110
?49gts;pu?•;a . ;i- ^ ., Y+. ?.. "" .?"' rr.y. .,.?r?wr?. ?.s+?

?iq I ? , ? b f Z..
..
'Yl'k X 'W`?, t5 r?i F {tt? x ? a?{ I
x ? ? 1 3r a? Jr!
A t ^a ,
.. ,?
C>V
a
q
'
"f
I
r
;?
'„yt?'t
"A L
f
l
r
,i?
?. . 8
t
'
h
##
^
4
oe i ?
. r
?c?.•,
l? ^ Y- w
.
ff
'1 a+?elT1 n,r us'p b ?F
`Y
r + i C? } .r
?. 'M, t
F1
y
rt { 2 ? ? ,`? ?r It M
N,!?? ? ?
. ? JY?ti^1y,
r?,
"" CC
?
r
?{{.? Gf
.4- m P? ?,,"+Ra?'.'V? 1? ',?r ,?s??t'; ? pP[t
i n8! ? ??
?. . • !
- .v . tr•
Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 4, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
t +q 1,? 9W,
? z!wa ` s
'i . ?N ?s'+d f "•T" S, ¢ "'.' ?1' '••'S.Z'b'!'"'r
4Nv
r. ^q?' ,? y ? ?kl" '??' '??: ? -}" " '• ?k ?fir".
dIR f .Y
hYA;? o
1 ?y1 ., 7? r 1,, i•+,?'?C 'X .+,
`A tF'?? .Ir r?.1 ??'.!N(ry?A ?•. ,!6?n'.4 y???yC ? '? ? { a',, ?. \ ?` w.?'+?^ '!e.l '.:{
?'?" Aa , ?` A A{, ° ? t ?•`?r 'r r ? l? ? 1?.. 'l ? ? ? ?'h?1? b..{?Yy s? t p_ ,? t I r!
w 1,". ! o47 Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 4, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.

111
T4 •-t9 n.C
..-
A»

Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 5, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

5

b
i? %: ?}s
.
ro b a
l
? ?'

f

aJ ?'*1 ?I 1. y 11 -?l' t '^Z k _ Y y?;,'?, •
t,?, '?" ? ;. 'y? ? nN,??, ?Od [ (?r,,jj ? re +Fy?, "?`}??/ ' 6. r?"?`` 'y'.r.a,?,yy,'??",'4 A k A, ?• +'. Aa `? ! x
V"
x1 t?s a t' s 1,'5 ?a94eT M*i?;' wF
79?F " ?y?, h y
?. i._.C:7a?_? :??..^
awti? ....
Unnamed tributary A, Photo Point 5, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC

112

ti'R
°"1

M..
e
R
Y
Sd'a
.a?

3
?
?
' *
;
T,,,_w a °
.'Y. fi;.. e
t,n.
..3"•y" Yl_. ,_
^.1+ti. .•,,•,
Stream UTB from head of project looking downstream,
113
Stream UTB from head of project looking downstream,
Stream UTB from head of project looking downstream,
August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.

f ?
r
> a t
4 p
MM ?} K ?f
Stre
am u i u num imulJV1111 01 PrOJe(;l 10OKing aownstream,
July 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

Oft

Stream UTB from midpoint of project looking downstream,
uctoner zuU/, banner Elk, NC

1'
y ?
g N4,. u

Strea
m UTB from midpoint of project lookinll downstri
yam,
August 2008, Banner Elk, NC
114
,
IC'
h
YY1Y y '
YY fi?r) %4,g. A
Stream UTB looking downstream to end of project,
July 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
w
1 -
y y..
d
Stream UTB looking downstream to end of project,
' October 2007, Banner Elk, NC.
' Stream UTB looking downstream to end of project,
August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
' 115
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 1, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

116
r

'M

Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 2, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
117
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 2, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
5? :4w?s Y ?$??/}\
. c•
-F
IwR 0'
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 3, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
1
?R' A Mf tIF"
M l p1{; a 7
'•?' '"'? ?t':A ' i?(x •?`,+P' ? `:? ? 'P ''?^c?#+? 3 N ?a 4• ?', r0.?? 1 ? ,4R... p
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 3, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
118
,
04
A4r
4? L {yam hl,r„ w°" .
toi
?i-
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 4, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
v ?' rte'
rd L' r, ?F} +" +k,.. 4" r i GMs
? .? .5?• ?,°TN jryj ?f ?? rl
/ yp
i Wr Y
ki,
A11 y
.. ^v ' . u^7?" . +-,? q "?41?" .e Ve.?,, . ?i ?. ae
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 4, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
119

d yQ .

M. p
owl,

t

Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 5, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
,. '
ir. .
SS?y ty? #1 {.p J9 J
"Al
eY { 1 X" k z-
} i air b4 7 r
AIIII.
' I w
3 r
r rh
,. s
r i '" _?.r } _ yrvw.?
,r 4 rvrv i, ,'Yrv, wL . S r. > ` ?t y t {?Y
'q f 1?
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 5, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
120

t! w y 1e
r?
Ga
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 6, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
a y?. [ f fi
'q V s1 4 ' 'b ))YYn?I, 4 ay p
Y'Vv i ? VY+?i
4! -?r?'P.-?>i '?? sba r• aS 1.' ,?M"'' ,? t 1 r A ?t, "ti'
t RI' R? !!k h.+r'
.. -Iz- M tut,
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 6, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
121

ti.
h t
e?
`.nom

y r *, Fk„-
a ? n '? `?M tW? .tc
1
i ?
+a
Yd
e ?aSr
xr T"td 4 air "?V ! }
F? ?,°1e+ •' a? ? ? ? ? ? rye" ?« '' w? ? ,?? ?ay' ?'
! y ?r 4
" -,•...rv` }m;t`=,- tars a•?t""w,?"'r?.",,y??;
.r , . u ?,"? :.? ?, rat '; • `, + . ?
lot;
Y
p 4 5
? yS } t + A
t t?
pw
a" f 0
k4 ,
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 7, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
122
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 7, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.

1

y rv ?? r k 4 h wr iµMf
?, ? ?f f n ?r1P M°
A Q
9. 14,
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 8, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
4V
Q ?y 1 R , ? r?M
0"VO I'M
f R
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 8, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
123
1il?l??0 4
ly"
I,?'Iw VMI a y???' °I« " 9 ?AN,,y?
?r
J
s

? a 0.. "' .a+ d-7• TtA? y R ?y "r +? S1 ,t.
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 9, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
',
;30' 1-71M
a i a - m ?e p kt
4 L I,I ?'° fk Y
°• yam. } 3,q C??I ? tr??lx y, 1 d K ? rN 6
,
? I
a't• ¢ ?'' ? ?• i y ? . e?[ y?,p?T ? f " ?*fy? w ???N -.. ?' ?? R ? ( ? 1 Mr` ??.Y? a
g V,, ,9 y`+ rnr - I W. i?9i7s?? ¢?'? ? .. n, n???;?•, f ??„
k w
/FiM17 ? fl '?e'• Y` '? ?'?
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 9, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
124
{ D ? s
?,„;a tcs
y ?jy"3, Pj1'4? M1:p 4 ?f r
M1r ? r a } "F y` ? L? ?. 4Y i11A pu 1?
?? 11 Rr d M1FV d ?A ? •??9
1 y
X11
x"'* .?i -l ?'?' ?? ?? fr, ?.{ ?? 'st FL^1Y h k? ? 4,•"4ry ?? s
271,
'r° i 'c his+"
? a e@r i ? :i

Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 10, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
_ x
t'a
{ V
LM-
1
4 »
y, ^ bx Y a.
? d>i `•'? M1 ? ?fr???y?
4
?' F M Y I
r ?' r
y.r? :? ., Wj4'?nn ryI
RAM} eye •'""_
?.,?.,+y '9•? d? ! rfi ?`gK? ?ri '?. A ;°1r tl °? { d 7?7 ?#° .ww { j'
sd ur
j a a 's aa?.: aYI ii
. #?" IAi+'? ?yI flc <r `g^it?A? k? "" 1 r s f ! r
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 10, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
125

A
s 0
A}( S
?Y$ A Ns
Y .rr?
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 11, October 2006, Banner Elk, NC.
9' A FFrr `
1.2
L S,r.',i ir' a'
5i
IA VP 51-,
1, x? Y ???i / fir S}i 6 ^? n ,v f. yr?
?h ?'? CAA +" fr` r'1 F'+r? x ° Fd (`? y v E u` ?' ''?"' rv
g.•.. x + - a. k IA e.'r y as ? ?? +« k?? a '.,A Ya k /?.
rx i
W
4 ? 4+++? °F , ? ??. ? , .P i
t$? r {?l? ?`g u a kE
J7..IV
r
bA` w ? d?' •1. +>r i ?A h Y '"t 4
f,k4?c'
y ?' M?'!?",f ., ? ''.tea. ss a ?" tf, ,*?????:..:?'"* ?qs.?,,. ? t ? o ti',1:'??`@?..?4"?'P?i ;??`???
Unnamed tributary B, Photo Point 11, August 2008, Banner Elk, NC.
126

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
c
50.00
0 40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.01
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
c
50.00
a
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.01
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Loaves - Year 1 monitoring - Elk River
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Loaves - Year 3 monitoring - Elk River
127
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size - Finer Than (mm)
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size - Finer Than (mm)

0
u

1
1
n
1
1

1

1
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Lowes - Year 1 monitoring - UTA
100.00 l-. 1 , '- i i L I l? T?
, _ I I i

90.00
?11 I II
i ,
l 11
8000 ?lII
R
h
S I+ : ._
I
i
I
I
eac
ummary I
70.00 - - Riffle Summary
- -Pool Summary
c 60.00
d
g 50.00
m [+I

?

1

?

?
I l
f

?

a I I I

II
I _ I
i ,

40.00

,

/

i tt+t !

1 ? ,ilia
l

0.00 J

-- tf
II ? ,1?
11 I I ' 11

- i I
20.00

I -
_l II I ?

I
' l I'
jj?
10.00
- I I??
j
I _

0.00
- II
1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size - Finer Than (mm)
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Lowes - Year 3 monitoring - UTA
100.00
jfl
_ L?aft]
_i
T_
90.00 r,?{}
80
00 II
. -

- -
?
70.00 - ? -
1 {
III
?
?
1
1 ?
I
? II?
I
I ?
11
i 1 j
i
Reach Summary
60.00

c
- - Riffle Summary

1
50.00
d - - - Pool Summary
Il,
40.00 ?i. ;

30.00

1

II I 1

I I I a
I

20.00
I
li '
11
I L I

1
I -
? ii

10.00 I I
1
I
I I ?
I

0.00 I I
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size - Finer Than (mm)
128
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Lowes - Year 1 monitoring - UTB
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
c
50.00
u
IL
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle Size - Finer Than (mm)
Sediment Distribution by Feature
Banner Elk Lowes - Year 3 monitoring - UTB
1000 10000
100.00
' 90.00

80.00 r

70.00 '
so.oo Reac
h Summary
1
}
- ' Riffle Summary
50.00
d
a
?. - -Pool Summary
40.00
I
I
I
? ? I

30.00
i I
? I _L
I I I
L
I± f l ? I 1
20.00
10.00
' 0.00
1
0.01 .1
1
10 1
00
1000 10000
Particle Size -Finer Than (mm)
129

1
1
1
1
1
1
CPO
O
cp
J
00 a
I,, P
.?
I
4
o
U I I ? I
Cd
CPO
W cp
0?.?
0
cP
?. cd l o
o CPO
o `POS. ?r Q
I I
I
CP j p
I
p cP h0 U
? W o ? II 00
I
N
cp
.r4, S, I
?e?s.
?.
9
O
cf'0
O r0
cp
f
O0?
C)
?n ?n o kn o V) o
?p
--a ? N N M O0? ? c?
. 0 ; l
(SOgDUI) u011-Bn31H 10
130

', it I I
0p
Cam.
doOc'JaQ?? Pj
Op
0 1
I
CR pp 10 0
Cam ?l. n
N c .
j
O J ?
I
U
CPO
cpp
1
I
O
c?
W ?
<6
cp
00 ff. ?;
CPO
° I i dpp f? f ? I
(U all
v; C'. fO °u' `POp?
00
Q
0
W oo Off,
N CP ?.r
S
q9
O
ti I i 00 ? j i
o cp
p0 ?'
c pp
d,pleL% j
O j
O o '
P,, Y
-_t_ - `PO
o v? o ?n o ?n o j^'
N N M Op Zf` l
i i
9
(SOg3UI) UOIIL'naj'j j0
131
1
1

1
1

M
i..r
.-. W
W
o
0
v?
W
w °
0
? N
o ~'
L CPO
?. P.
(jo??JaP
O
i
1
J
?b Q 1
CP N?•,?
?.
CP,
O I cpc?
e,
o e
o r. r
z
CP
i ? 00 ? I
cp
00
c' f1S
? ?s
I ? ? f
CP
i I `POO 'l?, sf
5 10
(:p
`p,
X00 ?? Sf
v? o kn o kn o kn o
CPIO
9
lrf?l
(uOut) uoTIVnaiLl O

132
Q
110
0
0
a?
0

w
o
? N
00
W °
? N
b
U?
r `PO
O?
?o?`JP9
?0 J
a
R
qq
C .
?J rr
cp
c p 00??, ``r
cp
cp
C&%
c ??-
`Z/ r
Qt
z?'? r
c P
P,
O ?b r0
Po
t J'Oi -
SI
v>O knO tf)N C) 1r) NMO cP,
0?•?&
(S3g3UI) UOIJUAajg O
133
v
Q
--
'o
a?
0
Il?o
U?r

00
O
O
N
Q
00
0
' o
N U
u?
0
U
a
?o I
ce aP9
2J
a
I ?? ? X00 ??
cp t?.
oO??o4
i X00 ?(p' -;
?r C?
cp ?6 Q
T?
CPO, j
cpo j
o 0
,
v? rt M N O f`
O ?
li
le,
r.
(s3u3ui) uoijpj!di33.id
134
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Elk River Crest Gage Readings, January 2008-December 2008
Banner Elk, NC
4 - - - - - -
o
`J 4
-12
3
-16 -
T, r
o°?^ o°?^ o°?^ ^ c?P?nc?A?^?????? o°?^ o?°o°?^ o?°% cP?^A^ z%o°?^ c??/cps^ Az ;v V V V V V V V V V ti ti ti ti, ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti
'10' go 'A 4 c' c'
o? o? it Q, tip'?oe?•e'p???L"?p?Q o? gip, °q
Date
Elk River Stream Gage Readings, January 2008-December 2008
Banner Elk, NC
40 - - -
-
35 -- - -
30 -
25
> 20
15
5 -
E 10 -
-5 -
°o?0 oc°°%o%???v?? b °%
o cA cP cA cA cP cP cA o o cA d? o o cS? c? cP o°
ti;v;v;?titititi
4,??05'K 6'YQ?c,
o-,,' "cb rl??
Date
- - I
-
135